Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T10:14:07.666Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Systematic review of the effectiveness of home versus hospital or satellite unit hemodialysis for people with end-stage renal failure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2004

Graham Mowatt
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen
Luke Vale
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen
Alison MacLeod
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen

Abstract

Background: Home hemodialysis offers potential advantages over hospital hemodialysis, including the opportunity for more frequent and/or longer dialysis sessions. Expanding home hemodialysis services may help cope with the increasing numbers of people requiring hemodialysis.

Methods: We sought comparative studies or systematic reviews of home versus hospital/satellite unit hemodialysis for people with end-stage renal failure (ESRF). Outcomes included quality of life and survival. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthSTAR, CINAHL, PREMEDLINE, and BIOSIS. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies included.

Results: Twenty-seven studies of variable quality were included. People on home hemodialysis generally experienced a better quality of life and lived longer than those on hospital hemodialysis. Their partners, however, found home hemodialysis more stressful. Four studies using a Cox proportional hazards model to compare home with hospital hemodialysis reported a lower mortality risk for home hemodialysis. Of two studies using a Cox model to compare home with satellite unit hemodialysis, one reported a similar mortality risk, whereas the other reported a lower mortality risk for home hemodialysis.

Conclusions: Home hemodialysis was generally associated with better outcomes than hospital hemodialysis and (more modestly so) satellite unit hemodialysis, in terms of quality of life, survival, and other measures of effectiveness. People on home hemodialysis, however, are a highly selected group. Home hemodialysis also provides the opportunity for more frequent and/or longer dialysis sessions than would otherwise be possible. It is difficult to disentangle the true effects of home hemodialysis from such influencing factors.

Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arkouche W, Traeger J, Delawari E, et al. Twenty-five years of experience with out-center hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 1999 56: 22692275.Google Scholar
Bremer BA, McCauley CR, Wrona RM, Johnson JP. Quality of life in end-stage renal disease: A reexamination. Am J Kidney Dis. 1989 13: 200209.Google Scholar
Cameron JI, Whiteside C, Katz J, Devins GM. Differences in quality of life across renal replacement therapies: A meta-analytic comparison. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000 35: 629637.Google Scholar
Capelli JP, Camiscioli TC, Vallorani RD, Bobeck JD. Comparative analysis of survival on home hemodialysis, in-center hemodialysis and chronic peritoneal dialysis (CAPD-IPD) therapies. Dial Transplant. 1985 14: 3852.Google Scholar
Churchill DN. 1988 The effect of treatment modality on the quality of life for patients with end-stage renal disease. In: Khanna R, editor. Advances in CAPD. Toronto: Peritoneal Dialysis Bulletin Inc: 6365.
Courts NF, Boyette BG. Psychosocial adjustment of males on three types of dialysis. Clin Nurs Res. 1998 7: 4763.Google Scholar
Covic A. Impact of the renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality on autonomic nervous system function. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1998 13: A112.Google Scholar
Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998 52: 377384.Google Scholar
Evans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison LP, Jr, et al. The quality of life of patients with end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med. 1985 312: 553559.Google Scholar
Freeman RM, Richards CJ. Studies on sulfate in end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int. 1979 15: 167175.Google Scholar
Hart LG, Evans RW. The functional status of ESRD patients as measured by the Sickness Impact Profile. J Chronic Dis. 1987 40 (Suppl 1): 117S136S.Google Scholar
Hellerstedt WL, Johnson WJ, Ascher N, et al. Survival rates of 2,728 patients with end-stage renal disease. Mayo Clin Proc. 1984 59: 776783.Google Scholar
Jacobs C, Selwood NH. Renal replacement therapy for end-stage renal failure in France: Current status and evolutive trends over the last decade. Am J Kidney Dis. 1995 25: 188195.Google Scholar
Livesley WJ. Factors associated with psychiatric symptoms in patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. Can J Psychiatry. 1981 26: 562566.Google Scholar
Mailloux LU, Kapikian N, Napolitano B, Mossey RT, Bellucci AG. Home hemodialysis: Patient outcomes during a 24-year period of time from 1970 through 1993. Adv Ren Replace Ther. 1996 3: 112119.Google Scholar
McGee MG. Familial response to chronic illness: The impact of home versus hospital dialysis. J Am Assoc Nephrol Nurses Tech. 1981 8: 912.Google Scholar
McGregor DO, Buttimore AL, Lynn KL, Nicholls MG, Jardine DL. A comparative study of blood pressure control with short in-center versus long home hemodialysis. Blood Purif. 2001 19: 293300.Google Scholar
Mohr PE, Neumann PJ, Franco SJ, et al. The case for daily dialysis: Its impact on costs and quality of life. Am J Kidney Dis. 2001 37: 777789.Google Scholar
Oxman AD. Checklists for review articles. BMJ. 1994 309: 648651.Google Scholar
Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. The science of reviewing research. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1993 703: 125133.Google Scholar
Page S, Weisberg MG. Marital and family characteristics of home and hospital dialysis patients. Loss Grief Care. 1991 5: 3345.Google Scholar
Parsons DS, Harris DC. A review of quality of life in chronic renal failure. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997 12 (pt 1): 140160.Google Scholar
Piltz-Kirkby M, Fox MA. Support systems as a factor in hemodialysis…home hemodialysis over in-center hemodialysis. Nephrol Nurse. 1982 4: 1926.Google Scholar
Price JD, Ashby KM, Reeve CE. Results of 12 years' treatment of chronic renal failure by dialysis and transplantation. Can Med Assoc J. 1978 118: 263266.Google Scholar
Reichwald-Klugger E, Tieben-Heibert A, Korn R, et al. Psychosocial adaptation of children and their parents to hospital and home hemodialysis. Int J Pediatr Nephrol. 1984 5: 4552.Google Scholar
Rubin J, Hsu H, Bower J. Survival on dialysis therapy: One center's experience. Am J Med Sci. 1989 297: 8090.Google Scholar
Schreiber WK, Huber W. Psychological situation of dialysis patients and their families. Dial Transplant. 1985 14: 696698.Google Scholar
Scottish Renal Association. 2001. Scottish Renal Registry second annual report, 1999. Edinburgh: Common Services Agency, ISD
Soskolne V, De Nour AK. Psychosocial adjustment of home hemodialysis, continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and hospital dialysis patients and their spouses. Nephron. 1987 47: 266273.Google Scholar
UK Renal Registry. 2000. Annual report. Bristol: The UK Renal Registry
Westlie L, Umen A, Nestrud S, Kjellstrand CM. Mortality, morbidity, and life satisfaction in the very old dialysis patient. Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Organs. 1984 30: 2130.Google Scholar
Williams GW, Weller JM, Ferguson CW, Forsythe SB, Wu SC. Survival of endstage renal disease patients: Age-adjusted differences in treatment outcomes. Kidney Int. 1983 24: 691693.Google Scholar
Woods JD, Port FK, Stannard D, Blagg CR, Held PJ. Comparison of mortality with home hemodialysis and center hemodialysis: A national study. Kidney Int. 1996 49: 14641470.Google Scholar