Advance care planning for 600 Chinese patients with end-stage renal disease

Distribution Width of Red Blood Cells and Related Factors Among Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Background

RDW is critical to the clinical diagnosis and progression of ESRD. There is currently little data on the relationship between RDW and ESRD in sub-Saharan Africa. Because of this, the present study evaluates RDW in patients with ESRD and associated factors in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Methods

The hospital-based cross-sectional study design was conducted on a total of 83 patients. RDW, MCV, SCR, BUN, GFR, FBS and serum albumin were determined. Blood pressure (mmHg), weight (kg), height (m), MUAC (cm) and BMI (kg/m2) were also measured. Data entry was via Epi-data version 3.4 and analyzed with SPSS version 26.0. A multivariate logistic regression analysis with a p-value < 0.05 at a 95% confidence interval was used to identify the associated factors of RDW.

Results

A total of 83 ESRD patients participated, with a response rate of 95.4%. RDW ranged from 15.5% to 23.6% with a mean of 17.40% + 1.46%. Anisocytosis was present in 98.8% of patients. Of 83 patients, 66.3% were hypertensive, 20.5% had diabetes, and the remaining 13.3% had other conditions (glomerulonephritis and peripheral vascular disease). The mean GFR value was 5.20 mL/min/1.73 + 1.58. RDW showed a significant association with GFR (AOR: 4.6, 95% CI [1.27, 20.74], P = 0.047), alcohol consumption (AOR: 13.4, P = 0.012, 95% CI [1.97, 22.62]), recurrent kidney disease (AOR=25.6, P=0.016, 95% CI [1.85, 53.71]) and use of medication (AOR=00.2, P=0.044), 95% CI [0.03, 0.95]).

Conclusion

RDW showed a significant association with GFR, recurrent kidney disease, alcohol consumption, and medication use in hemodialysis-dependent ESRD patients. The mechanisms of RDW disruption in ESRD patients need further investigation.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Non-dialytic conservative care (CC) has been proposed as a treatment option for patients with kidney failure. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims at comparing survival outcomes between dialysis and CC in studies where patients made an explicit treatment choice.

Methods

Five databases were systematically searched from origin through 25 February 2021 for studies comparing survival outcomes among patients choosing dialysis versus CC. Adjusted and unadjusted survival rates were extracted and meta-analysis performed where applicable. Risk of bias analysis was performed according to the Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions.

Results

A total of 22 cohort studies were included covering 21 344 patients. Most studies were prone to selection bias and confounding. Patients opting for dialysis were generally younger and had fewer comorbid conditions, fewer functional impairments and less frailty than patients who chose CC. The unadjusted median survival from treatment decision or an estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m² ranged from 20 and 67 months for dialysis and 6 and 31 months for CC. Meta-analysis of 12 studies that provided adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality showed a pooled adjusted HR of 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.39–0.57) for patients choosing dialysis compared with CC. In subgroups of patients with older age or severe comorbidities, the reduction of mortality risk remained statistically significant, although analyses were unadjusted.

Conclusions

Patients opting for dialysis have an overall lower mortality risk compared with patients opting for CC. However, a high risk of bias and heterogeneous reporting preclude definitive conclusions and results cannot be translated to an individual level.

Does conservative kidney management offer a quantity or quality of life benefit compared to dialysis? A systematic review

Background

Patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD5) collaborate with their clinicians when choosing their future treatment modality. Most elderly patients with CKD5 may only have two treatment options: dialysis or conservative kidney management (CKM). The objective of this systematic review was to investigate whether CKM offers a quantity or quality of life benefit compared to dialysis for some patients with CKD5.

Methods

The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were systematically searched for studies comparing patients with CKD5 who had chosen or were treated with either CKM or dialysis. The primary outcomes were mortality and quality of life (QoL). Hospitalization, symptom burden, and place of death were secondary outcomes. For studies reporting hazard ratios, pooled values were calculated, and forest plots conducted.

Results

Twenty-five primary studies, all observational, were identified. All studies reported an increased mortality in patients treated with CKM (pooled hazard ratio 0.47, 95 % confidence interval 0.34–0.65). For patients aged ≥ 80 years and for elderly individuals with comorbidities, results were ambiguous. In most studies, CKM seemed advantageous for QoL and secondary outcomes. Findings were limited by the heterogeneity of studies and biased outcomes favouring dialysis.

Conclusions

In general, patients with CKD5 who have chosen or are on CKM live for a shorter time than patients who have chosen or are on dialysis. In patients aged ≥ 80 years old, and in elderly individuals with comorbidities, the survival benefits of dialysis seem to be lost. Regarding QoL, symptom burden, hospitalization, and place of death, CKM may have advantages. Higher quality studies are needed to guide patients and clinicians in the decision-making process.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-021-02516-6.

Health-related quality of life and symptoms of conservative care versus dialysis in patients with end-stage kidney disease: a systematic review

Background

Non-dialytic conservative care (CC) has been proposed as a viable alternative to maintenance dialysis for selected older patients to treat end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). This systematic review compares both treatment pathways on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptoms, which are major outcomes for patients and clinicians when deciding on preferred treatment.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus and PsycINFO from inception to 1 October 2019 for studies comparing patient-reported HRQoL outcomes or symptoms between patients who chose either CC or dialysis for ESKD.

Results

Eleven observational cohort studies were identified comprising 1718 patients overall. There were no randomized controlled trials. Studies were susceptible to selection bias and confounding. In most studies, patients who chose CC were older and had more comorbidities and worse functional status than patients who chose dialysis. Results were broadly consistent across studies, despite considerable clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Patient-reported physical health outcomes and symptoms appeared to be worse in patients who chose CC compared with patients who chose dialysis but had not yet started, but similar compared with patients on dialysis. Mental health outcomes were similar between patients who chose CC or dialysis, including before and after dialysis start. In patients who chose dialysis, the burden of kidney disease and impact on daily life increased after dialysis start.

Conclusions

The available data, while heterogeneous, suggest that in selected older patients, CC has the potential to achieve similar HRQoL and symptoms compared with a dialysis pathway. High-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm these provisional findings.

Hemodialysis as a life-sustaining treatment at the end of life

The Act on Decisions on Life-Sustaining Treatment for Patients in Hospice and Palliative Care or at the End of Life came into effect on February 4th, 2018, in South Korea. Based on the Act, all Koreans over the age of 19 years can decide whether to refuse life-sustaining treatments at the end of life via advance directive or physician orders. Hemodialysis is one of the options designated in the Act as a life-sustaining treatment that can be withheld or withdrawn near death. However, hemodialysis has unique features. So, it is not easy to determine the best candidates for withholding/withdrawing hemodialysis at the end of life. Thus, it is necessary to investigate the meaning and implications of hemodialysis at the end of life with ethical consideration of futility and withholding or withdrawal of intervention.

Adherence to Hemodialysis and Associated Factors among End Stage Renal Disease Patients at Selected Nephrology Units in Rwanda: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Worldwide, End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) has become a public health concern increasing the number of patients maintained on hemodialysis prior to renal transplantation. Nonadherence to hemodialysis continues to impact on the care of ESRD patients, causing high increase in morbidity and mortality.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to determine the level of adherence to hemodialysis and the associated factors among End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients in selected nephrology units in Rwanda.

Methods

This was a descriptive cross-sectional design involving 41 participants. Participants were recruited using a purposive sampling technique. Demographic and adherence to hemodialysis data were collected with the use of structured interview schedules. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic variables and the level of adherence to hemodialysis. Inferential statistics of chi-square was used to establish factors associated with adherence to hemodialysis.

Results

Twenty-one (51%) of ESRD participants adhered highly (scores < 80%) to HD. Seventeen (42%) adhered moderately (70–79%) to HD while three (7%) had low level of adherence to HD (below 70%). The factors associated with adherence to hemodialysis were age (mean = 27; 95% CI 26.76–29, 17; p = 038) and religion (95% CI 26.29–60.12, p = 003). Frequencies of education of health care workers about the importance of not missing dialysis (95% CI 26.71–42.56, p = .000), perceived relative importance of hemodialysis (95% CI 20.44–27.76, p = .020), and experiencing difficulties during the procedure (95% CI 20.80–28.36, p = .004) were significantly associated with adherence to hemodialysis. Conclusion. Adherence to hemodialysis is still a public health concern in Rwanda. Health care providers and particularly nurses should continue to advocate for adherence to HD for better health outcomes. Further research is needed to identify the barriers to HD in Rwanda.