A comparison of self-reported quality of life for an Australian haemodialysis and haemodiafiltration cohort

The CONVINCE randomized trial found positive effects on quality of life for patients with chronic kidney disease treated with hemodiafiltration

In the CONVINCE trial, the primary analysis demonstrated a survival benefit for patients receiving high-dose hemodiafiltration (HDF) as compared with high-flux hemodialysis (HD). A secondary objective was to evaluate effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL); assessed in eight domains (physical function, cognitive function, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, pain interference, social participation) applying instruments from the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) before randomization and every three months thereafter. In total 1360 adults with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease, eligible to receive high-flux HDF (23 liters or more), were randomized (1:1); 84% response rate to all questionnaires. Both groups reported a continuous deterioration in all HRQoL domains. Overall, raw score changes from baseline were more favorable in the HDF group, resulting in a significant omnibus test after a median observation period of 30 months. Most relevant single raw score differences were reported for cognitive function. Patients receiving HDF reported a decline of -0.95 units (95% confidence interval - 2.23 to +0.34) whereas HD treated patients declined by -3.90 units (-5.28 to - 2.52). A joint model, adjusted for mortality differences, utilizing all quarterly assessments, identified a significantly slower HRQoL decline in physical function, cognitive function, pain interference, and social participation for the HDF group. Their physical health summary score declined -0.46 units/year slower compared to the HD group. Thus, the CONVINCE trial showed a beneficial effect of high-dose hemodiafiltration for survival as well as a moderate positive effect on patients' quality of life, most pronounced with respect to their cognitive function. REGISTRATION: NTR7138 on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

Quality of Life and Hemodynamic Effects of Switching From Hemodialysis to Hemodiafiltration: A Canadian Controlled Cohort Study

Background:

Recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated beneficial effects of hemodiafiltration (HDF) compared with hemodialysis (HD) on mortality and hemodynamic stability. Data on quality of life in HDF compared with HD is limited.

Objective:

This study aimed to determine whether patients receiving HD experience improvements in quality of life, hemodynamic and laboratory parameters after switching to HDF.

Design:

Observational controlled cohort study.

Setting & Patients:

Adult patients receiving maintenance dialysis were followed for 3 months both before and after transfer to a new unit, where they received HDF. Prior to transfer, control patients were already treated by HDF.

Methods:

Quality of life at baseline and follow-up was measured using the validated minutes to recovery (MR) question. Dialysis data were collected for 3 consecutive sessions monthly; laboratory values were collected monthly. Wilcoxon signed rank test and repeated measures analysis of covariance were used to evaluate pre/post transfer changes and quantile regression to identify predictors of change in recovery time.

Results:

Of 227 patients, 82 died, were transplanted, were hospitalized or did not transfer, leaving 123 subjects and 22 controls for analysis. MR did not improve with switching to HDF, although patients with MR > 60 min before transfer experienced a significant decrease in their MR, compared with controls. There was no improvement in intradialytic hypotension with HDF. There were no differences in laboratory values before vs after switch.

Limitations:

Nonrandomized single-center study, including only small numbers of patients and covering a short follow-up period; hemodynamic values only evaluated over 1 week per month; residual kidney function not recorded.

Conclusions:

In this Canadian experience of HDF, patients remained stable with respect to several laboratory and dialysis related parameters. Switch to HDF was associated with substantially reduced recovery time in patients with MR > 60 minutes at baseline.

Effect of dialysis modality on frailty phenotype, disability, and health-related quality of life in maintenance dialysis patients

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) surveys are needed to evaluate regional and ethnic specificies. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the differences in HRQoL, frailty, and disability according to dialysis modality in the Korean population.

Patients and methods

We enrolled relatively stable maintenance dialysis patients. A total of 1,616 patients were recruited into our study. The demographic and laboratory data collected at enrollment included age, sex, comorbidities, frailty, disability, and HRQoL scales.

Results

A total of 1,250 and 366 participants underwent hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD), respectively. The numbers of participants with pre-frailty and frailty were 578 (46.2%) and 422 (33.8%) in HD patients, and 165 (45.1%) and 137 (37.4%) in PD patients, respectively (P = 0.349). Participants with a disability included 195 (15.6%) HD patients and 109 (29.8%) PD patients (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, the mean physical component scale (PCS) and mental component scale (MCS), symptom/problems, and sleep scores were higher in HD patients than in PD patients. Cox regression analyses showed that an increased PCS in both HD and PD patients was positively associated with patient survival and first hospitalization–free survival. An increased MCS in both HD and PD patients was positively associated with first hospitalization–free survival only.

Conclusion

There was no significant difference in frailty between patients treated with the two dialysis modalities; however, disability was more common in PD patients than in HD patients. The MCS and PCS were more favorable in HD patients than in PD patients. Symptom/problems, sleep, quality of social interaction, and social support were more favorable in HD patients than in PD patients; however, patient satisfaction and dialysis staff encouragement were more favorable in PD patients than in HD patients.