Peritoneal Dialysis Technique Survival: A Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Reasons for transfer from peritoneal dialysis (PD) to hemodialysis (HD) remain incompletely understood. Among incident and prevalent patients receiving PD, we evaluated the association of clinical factors, including prior treatment with HD, with PD technique survival. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adults who initiated PD at a Dialysis Clinic, Inc (DCI) outpatient facility between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2019. EXPOSURE: The primary exposure of interest was timing of PD start, categorized as PD-first, PD-early, or PD-late. Other covariates included demographics, clinical characteristics, and routine laboratory results. OUTCOME: Modality switch from PD to HD sustained for more than 90 days. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable Fine-Gray models with competing risks and time-varying covariates, stratified at 9 months to account for lack of proportionality. RESULTS: Among 5,224 patients who initiated PD at a DCI facility, 3,174 initiated dialysis with PD ("PD-first"), 942 transitioned from HD to PD within 90 days ("PD-early"), and 1,108 transitioned beyond 90 days ("PD-late"); 1,472 (28%) subsequently transferred from PD to HD. The PD-early and PD-late patients had a higher risk of transfer to HD as compared with PD-first patients (in the first 9 months: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.17-1.96] and 2.41 [95% CI, 1.94-3.00], respectively; and after 9 months: AHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.99-1.35] and AHR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.24-1.65], respectively). More peritonitis episodes, fewer home visits, lower serum albumin levels, lower residual kidney function, and lower peritoneal clearance calculated with weekly Kt/V were additional risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer. LIMITATIONS: Missing data on dialysis adequacy and residual kidney function, confounded by short PD technique survival. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating dialysis with PD is associated with greater PD technique survival, though many of those who initiate PD-late in their dialysis course still experience substantial time on PD. Peritonitis, lower serum albumin, and lower Kt/V are risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer that may be amenable to intervention. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important kidney replacement modality with several potential advantages compared with in-center hemodialysis (HD). However, a substantial number of patients transfer to in-center HD early on, without having experienced the quality-of-life and other benefits that come with sustained maintenance of PD. Using retrospective data from a midsize national dialysis provider, we found that initiating dialysis with PD is associated with longer maintenance of PD, compared with initiating dialysis with HD and a later switch to PD. However, many of those who initiate PD-late in their dialysis course still experience substantial time on PD. Peritonitis, lower serum albumin, and lower small protein removal are other risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer that may be amenable to intervention.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Effectiveness and Breakthrough Infections Among Patients Receiving Maintenance Dialysis.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness and immunogenicity threshold associated with protection against COVID-19-related hospitalization or death in the dialysis population are unknown. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients without COVID-19 history receiving maintenance dialysis through a national dialysis provider and treated between February 1 and December 18, 2021, with follow-up through January 17, 2022. PREDICTOR: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status. OUTCOMES: All SARS-CoV-2 infections, composite of hospitalization or death following COVID-19. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Logistic regression was used to determine COVID-19 case rates and vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: Of 16,213 patients receiving dialysis during the study period, 12,278 (76%) were fully vaccinated, 589 (4%) were partially vaccinated, and 3,346 (21%) were unvaccinated by the end of follow-up. Of 1,225 COVID-19 cases identified, 550 (45%) occurred in unvaccinated patients, and 891 (73%) occurred during the Delta variant-dominant period. Between the pre-Delta period and the Delta-dominant period, vaccine effectiveness rates against a severe COVID-19-related event (hospitalization or death) were 84% and 70%, respectively. In the subset of 3,202 vaccinated patients with at least one anti-spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) assessment, lower anti-spike IgG levels were associated with higher case rates per 10,000 days and higher adjusted hazard ratios for infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization or death. LIMITATIONS: Observational design, residual biases, and confounding may exist. CONCLUSIONS: Among maintenance dialysis patients, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was associated with a lower risk of COVID-19 diagnosis and associated hospitalization or death. Among vaccinated patients, a low anti-spike IgG level is associated with worse COVID-19-related outcomes.

A real world comparison of HepB (Engerix-B®) and HepB-CpG (Heplisav-B®) vaccine seroprotection in patients receiving maintenance dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination against hepatitis B virus (HBV) is recommended for dialysis patients. Two reports comparing seroprotection (SP) rates following HepB and HepB-CpG in vaccine-naïve patients with chronic kidney disease enrolled few dialysis patients (n = 122 combined). SP rates in a subset of dialysis patients were not reported or not powered to detect statistically significant differences. SP rates in those requiring additional vaccine series or booster doses are not known. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis including dialysis patients completing HepB or HepB-CpG vaccination between January 2019 and December 2020. Vaccine-naïve patients received a series of HepB or HepB-CpG (Series 1). A repeat series was given to nonresponders (Series 2). A booster regimen consists of one dose of either vaccine. Primary outcome was achieving SP (anti-HBs >10 mIU/mL) at least 60 days after the last HBV vaccine dose for Series 1 and Series 2, and achieving SP at least 3 weeks post-booster. RESULTS: For Series 1 (n = 3509), SP after HepB vaccination was significantly higher (62.9% versus 50.1% for HepB-CpG; P < 0.0001). Series 2 (n = 1040) and booster (n = 2028) SP rates were similar between vaccines. Patients that received up to four HepB-CpG doses had higher SP rates compared with four doses of HepB (82.0% versus 62.9%, respectively; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: SP rates in hepatitis B vaccine-naïve dialysis patients administered a recommended four doses of HepB were higher than those recommended two doses of HepB-CpG. SP rates were higher and achieved sooner if HepB-CpG was utilized initially and, if needed, for Series 2. Optimal HepB-CpG dosing deserves further study.

Seroresponse to Inactivated and Recombinant Influenza Vaccines Among Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: High-dose influenza vaccine provides better protection against influenza infection in older adults than standard-dose vaccine. We compared vaccine seroresponse among hemodialysis patients over a period of 4 months after administration of high-dose trivalent inactivated (HD-IIV3), standard-dose quadrivalent inactivated (SD-IIV4), or quadrivalent recombinant quadrivalent (RIV4) influenza vaccine. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients at 4 hemodialysis clinics who received influenza vaccine. EXPOSURE: Type of influenza vaccine. OUTCOME: Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titers were measured at baseline and at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months after vaccination. The primary outcome was seroprotection rates at HI titers of at least 1:40 and at least 1:160 (antibody levels providing protection from infection in approximately 50% and 95% of immunocompetent individuals, respectively) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months after vaccination. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We calculated geometric mean titer as well as seroprotection and seroconversion rates. Adjusted generalized linear models with additional trend analyses were performed to evaluate the association between vaccine type and outcomes. RESULTS: 254 hemodialysis patients were vaccinated against influenza with HD-IIV3 (n = 141), SD-IIV4 (n = 36), or RIV4 (n = 77). A robust initial seroresponse to influenza A strains was observed after all 3 vaccines. Geometric mean titer and seroprotection (HI titer ≥1:160) rates against influenza A strains were higher and more sustained with HD-IIV3 than SD-IIV4 or RIV4. More than 80% of patients vaccinated with HD-IIV3 were seroprotected (HI titer ≥1:160) at month 4 (P < 0.001), whereas, among patients vaccinated with SD-IIV4 or RIV4, seroprotection rates were similar to those at baseline. Seroprotection rates were lower against B strains for all vaccines. LIMITATIONS: Because of the use of observational data, bias from unmeasured confounders may exist. Some age subgroups were small in number. Clinical outcome data were not available. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodialysis patients exhibited high seroprotection rates after all 3 influenza vaccines. The seroresponse waned more slowly with HD-IIV3 compared with SD-IIV4 and RIV4 vaccines.

Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving maintenance dialysis represent a high-risk, immune-compromised population with 15%-25% COVID-19 mortality rate who were unrepresented in clinical trials of mRNA vaccines. METHODS: All patients receiving maintenance dialysis who received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines with antibody test results drawn ≥14 days after the second dose, as documented in the electronic health record through March 18, 2021, were included. Response was on the basis of levels of Ig-G against the receptor binding domain of the S1 subunit of SARS-CoV-2 spike-antigen (seropositive ≥2 U/L) using an FDA-approved semiquantitative chemiluminescent assay (ADVIA Centaur XP/XPT COV2G). RESULTS: Among 186 patients on dialysis from 30 clinics in eight states tested 23±8 days after receiving two vaccine doses, there were 165 (88.7%) responders with 70% at maximum titer. There was no significant difference between BNT162b2/Pfizer (148 out of 168, 88.1%) and mRNA-1273/Moderna (17 out of 18, 94.4%), P=0.42. All 38 patients with COVID-19 history were responders, with 97% at maximum titer. Among patients without COVID-19, 127 out of 148 (85.8%) were responders, comparable between BNT162b2/Pfizer (113 out of 133) and mRNA-1273/Moderna (14 out of 15) vaccines (85.0% versus 93.3%, P=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients receiving maintenance dialysis responded after two doses of BNT162b2/Pfizer or mRNA-1273/Moderna vaccine, suggesting the short-term development of antispike antibody is good, giving hope that most of these patients who are vulnerable, once immunized, will be protected from COVID-19. Longer-term evaluation is needed to determine antibody titer durability and if booster dose(s) are warranted. Further research to evaluate the approach to patients without a serologic response is needed, including benefits of additional dose(s) or administration of alternate options.

COVID-19 Among US Dialysis Patients: Risk Factors and Outcomes From a National Dialysis Provider.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, patients receiving maintenance dialysis are a highly vulnerable population due to their comorbidities and circumstances that limit physical distancing during treatment. This study sought to characterize the risk factors for and outcomes following COVID-19 in this population. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Maintenance dialysis patients in clinics of a midsize national dialysis provider that had at least 1 patient who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from February to June 2020. PREDICTORS: Demographics, dialysis characteristics, residence in a congregated setting, comorbid conditions, measurements of frailty, and use of selected medications. OUTCOMES: COVID-19, defined as having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and all-cause mortality among those with COVID-19. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Logistic regression analyses conducted to identify clinical characteristics associated with COVID-19 and risk factors associated with mortality among patients following COVID-19. RESULTS: 438 of 7948 (5.5%) maintenance dialysis patients developed COVID-19. Male sex, Black race, in-center dialysis (vs home dialysis), treatment at an urban clinic, residence in a congregate setting, and greater comorbidity were associated with contracting COVID-19. Odds of COVID-19 were 17-fold higher for those residing in a congregated setting (odds ratio [OR], 17.10 [95% CI, 13.51-21.54]). Of the 438 maintenance dialysis patients with COVID-19, 109 (24.9%) died. Older age, heart disease, and markers of frailty were associated with mortality. LIMITATIONS: No distinction was detected between symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positivity, with asymptomatic screening limited by testing capacity during this initial COVID-19 surge period. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 is common among patients receiving maintenance dialysis, particularly those residing in congregate settings. Among maintenance dialysis patients with COVID-19, mortality is high, exceeding 20%.

Multidisciplinary Medication Therapy Management and Hospital Readmission in Patients Undergoing Maintenance Dialysis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVES: Dialysis patients frequently experience medication-related problems. We studied the association of a multidisciplinary medication therapy management (MTM) with 30-day readmission rates. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Maintenance dialysis patients discharged home from acute-care hospitals between May 2016 and April 2017 who returned to End-Stage Renal Disease Seamless Care Organization dialysis clinics after discharge were eligible. Patients who were readmitted within 3 days, died, or entered hospice within 30 days were excluded. EXPOSURE: MTM consisting of nurse medication reconciliation, pharmacist medication review, and nephrologist oversight was categorized into 3 levels of intensity: no MTM, partial MTM (defined as an incomplete MTM process), or full MTM (defined as a complete MTM process). OUTCOME: The primary outcome was 30-day readmission. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Time-varying Prentice, Williams, and Peterson total time hazards models explored associations between MTM and time to readmission after adjusting for age, race, sex, diabetes comorbidity, albumin level, vascular access type, kidney failure cause, dialysis vintage and modality, marital status, home medications, frequent prior hospitalizations, length of stay, discharge diagnoses, hierarchical condition category, and facility standardized hospitalization rates. Propensity score matching was performed to examine the robustness of the associations in a comparison between the full- and no-MTM exposure groups on time to readmission. RESULTS: Among 1,452 discharges, 586 received no MTM, 704 received partial MTM, and 162 received full MTM; 30-day readmission rates were 29%, 19%, and 11%, respectively (P < 0.001). Compared with no MTM, discharges with full MTM had the lowest time-varying risk for readmission within 30 days (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.45); discharges with partial MTM also had lower readmission risk (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68). In propensity score-matched sensitivity analysis, full MTM was associated with lower 30-day readmission risk (HR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06-0.69). LIMITATIONS: Reliance on observational data. Residual bias and confounding. CONCLUSIONS: MTM services following hospital discharge were associated with fewer 30-day readmissions in dialysis patients. Randomized controlled studies evaluating different MTM delivery models and cost-effectiveness in dialysis populations are warranted.

Chronic disease burdens of incident U.S. dialysis patients, 1996 - 2015
.

INTRODUCTION: The United States Renal Data System has collected data on incident hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients since 1995, allowing prevalence of chronic diseases over the past 20 years to be measured. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All first-time HD/PD patients 1996 - 2015 were analyzed. Diabetes and cardiovascular diseases were grouped into single variables. Prevalence of each condition was evaluated with logistic regression. Odds ratios (OR) for a 5-year difference in year of dialysis initiation were calculated. Models were adjusted for age, sex, and race, with interactions between modality and year. One- and 5-year mortality were calculated. RESULTS: Age increased among 1,847,212 HD and 156,965 PD patients; PD patients were younger. First-year mortality fell from 24.4 to 21.1% in HD patients and from 17.1 to 8.5% in PD. 5-year mortality fell from 65.9 to 58.6% in HD patients and from 56.3 to 40.4% in PD. Hypertension increased (OR = 1.34 for HD, 1.35 for PD), as did diabetes (OR = 1.16 for HD, 1.06 for PD) and cancer (OR = 1.09 for HD, 1.10 for PD). Cardiovascular disease decreased in PD (OR = 0.87) only. Stroke decreased (OR = 0.98 for HD, 0.90 for PD), as did peripheral vascular disease (OR = 0.91 for HD, 0.82 for PD). Lung disease increased in HD (OR = 1.10) but decreased in PD (OR = 0.97). DISCUSSION: Mortality and cardiovascular disease burden have declined for dialysis patients in the United States despite an aging population that is increasingly hypertensive and diabetic. Comorbid disease burdens among HD and PD patients have diverged over time, with PD patients having fewer comorbid conditions.

The TiME Trial: A Fully Embedded, Cluster-Randomized, Pragmatic Trial of Hemodialysis Session Duration.

BACKGROUND: Data from clinical trials to inform practice in maintenance hemodialysis are limited. Incorporating randomized trials into dialysis clinical care delivery should help generate practice-guiding evidence, but the feasibility of this approach has not been established. METHODS: To develop approaches for embedding trials into routine delivery of maintenance hemodialysis, we performed a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial demonstration project, the Time to Reduce Mortality in ESRD (TiME) trial, evaluating effects of session duration on mortality (primary outcome) and hospitalization rate. Dialysis facilities randomized to the intervention adopted a default session duration ≥4.25 hours (255 minutes) for incident patients; those randomized to usual care had no trial-driven approach to session duration. Implementation was highly centralized, with no on-site research personnel and complete reliance on clinically acquired data. We used multiple strategies to engage facility personnel and participating patients. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 7035 incident patients from 266 dialysis units. We discontinued the trial at a median follow-up of 1.1 years because of an inadequate between-group difference in session duration. For the primary analysis population (participants with estimated body water ≤42.5 L), mean session duration was 216 minutes for the intervention group and 207 minutes for the usual care group. We found no reduction in mortality or hospitalization rate for the intervention versus usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Although a highly pragmatic design allowed efficient enrollment, data acquisition, and monitoring, intervention uptake was insufficient to determine whether longer hemodialysis sessions improve outcomes. More effective strategies for engaging clinical personnel and patients are likely required to evaluate clinical trial interventions that are fully embedded in care delivery.

Transfers to Hemodialysis Among US Patients Initiating Renal Replacement Therapy With Peritoneal Dialysis.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Identifying patients who are likely to transfer from peritoneal dialysis (PD) to hemodialysis (HD) before transition could improve their subsequent care. This study developed a prediction tool for transition from PD to HD. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adults initiating PD between January 2008 and December 2011, followed up through June 2015, for whom data were available in the US Renal Data System (USRDS). PREDICTORS: Clinical characteristics at PD initiation and peritonitis claims. OUTCOMES: Transfer to HD, with the competing outcomes of death and kidney transplantation. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Outcomes were ascertained from USRDS treatment history files. Subdistribution hazards (competing-risk) models were fit using clinical characteristics at PD initiation. A nomogram was developed to classify patient risk at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years. These data were used to generate quartiles of HD transfer risk; this quartile score was incorporated into a cause-specific hazards model that additionally included a time-dependent variable for peritonitis. RESULTS: 29,573 incident PD patients were followed up for a median of 21.6 (interquartile range, 9.0-42.3) months, during which 41.2% transferred to HD, 25.9% died, 17.1% underwent kidney transplantation, and the rest were followed up to the study end in June 2015. Claims for peritonitis were present in 11,733 (40.2%) patients. The proportion of patients still receiving PD decreased to <50% at 22.6 months and 14.2% at 5 years. Peritonitis was associated with a higher rate of HD transfer (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.76-1.89; P < 0.001), as were higher quartile scores of HD transfer risk (HRs of 1.31 [95% CI, 1.25-1.37), 1.51 [95% CI, 1.45-1.58], and 1.78 [95% CI, 1.71-1.86] for quartiles 2, 3, and 4 compared to quartile 1 [P < 0.001 for all]). LIMITATIONS: Observational data, reliant on the Medical Evidence Report and Medicare claims. CONCLUSIONS: A large majority of the patients who initiated renal replacement therapy with PD discontinued this modality within 5 years. Transfer to HD was the most common outcome. Patient characteristics and comorbid diseases influenced the probability of HD transfer, death, and transplantation, as did episodes of peritonitis.

Ethical Issues in Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trials in Dialysis Facilities.

A pragmatic cluster-randomized trial (CRT) is a research design that may be used to efficiently test promising interventions that directly inform dialysis care. While the Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomized Trials provides general ethical guidance for CRTs, the dialysis setting raises additional considerations. In this article, we outline ethical issues raised by pragmatic CRTs in dialysis facilities. These issues may be divided into 7 key domains: justifying the use of cluster randomization, adopting randomly allocated individual-level interventions as a facility standard of care, conducting benefit-harm analyses, gatekeepers and their responsibilities, obtaining informed consent from research participants, patient notification, and including vulnerable participants. We describe existing guidelines relevant to each domain, illustrate how they were considered in the Time to Reduce Mortality in End-Stage Renal Disease (TiME) trial (a prototypical pragmatic hemodialysis CRT), and highlight remaining areas of uncertainty. The following is the first step in an interdisciplinary mixed-methods research project to guide the design and conduct of pragmatic CRTs in dialysis facilities. Subsequent work will expand on these concepts and when possible, argue for a preferred solution.

Hemodialysis patient characteristics associated with better experience as measured by the In-center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH CAHPS) survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience in hemodialysis (HD) is measured twice yearly in all in-center HD patients in the United States using the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH CAHPS) survey. Survey scores are publically available and incorporated into the dialysis payment system. Despite its importance, little is known about factors associated with better experience scores. We studied the association between patient-level characteristics and experience scores in a large real-world cohort of HD patients. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of ICH CAHPS administration in 2012. All in-center HD patients in Dialysis Clinic, Incorporated facilities nationally over 18 years old and receiving HD at their facility for at least 3 months were eligible. Predictors include patient demographic, clinical, and treatment-related characteristics. Outcomes include high global rating scores across three domains (Nephrologist, Dialysis Staff, Dialysis Center) and high composite scores across three domains (Nephrologists' Communication and Caring, Quality of Dialysis Center Care and Operations, and Providing Information to Patients). RESULTS: Among 3369 respondents, older age and telephone (vs. mail) administration of the survey were associated with higher global ratings, while shortened HD treatments were associated with lower global ratings. Lower education and telephone administration were associated with higher composite scores, while older age, and shortened HD treatments were associated with lower composite scores. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient characteristics and mode of survey administration are associated with higher experience scores. Future research should assess HD facility characteristics associated with higher scores and interventions that might improve experience accounting for these associations.

Evaluation of non-response to the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH CAHPS) survey.

BACKGROUND: The In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH CAHPS) Survey is the first patient reported outcome measure included in the U.S. Medicare End Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program. Administered twice yearly, it assesses in-center dialysis experience and survey responses are tied to dialysis facility payments. Low response rates, currently approximately 35%, raise concern for possible underrepresentation of patient groups. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of survey administration in 2012 to all in-center hemodialysis patients in Dialysis Clinic, Inc. (DCI) facilities nationally over 18 years old who received hemodialysis at their facility for at least 3 months. Patient-level covariates included demographic, clinical, laboratory, and functional characteristics. Random effects multivariable logistic regression was used to assess survey non-response. RESULTS: Among 11,055 eligible patients 6541 (59%) were non-responders. Of the remaining 4514 responders, 549 (14%) surveys were not usable due to presence of proxy help or incomplete responses. Non-responders were more likely to be men, non-white, younger, single, dual Medicare/Medicaid eligible, less educated, non-English speaking, and not active on the transplant list; non-responders had longer ESRD vintage, lower body mass index, lower serum albumin, worse functional status, and more hospitalizations, missed treatments, and shortened treatments. Similar associations were found using more parsimonious multivariable analyses and after imputing missing data. CONCLUSIONS: Non-responders to the ICH CAHPS significantly differed from responders, broadly spanning individuals with fewer socioeconomic advantages and greater illness burden, raising limitations in interpreting facility survey results. Future research should assess reasons for non-response to improve ICH CAHPS generalizability and utility.

Pragmatic Trials in Maintenance Dialysis: Perspectives from the Kidney Health Initiative.

Pragmatic clinical trials are conducted under the real-world conditions of clinical care delivery. As a result, these trials yield findings that are highly generalizable to the nonresearch setting, identify interventions that are readily translatable into clinical practice, and cost less than trials that require extensive research infrastructures. Maintenance dialysis is a setting especially well suited for pragmatic trials because of inherently frequent and predictable patient encounters, highly granular and uniform data collection, use of electronic data systems, and delivery of care by a small number of provider organizations to approximately 90% of patients nationally. Recognizing the potential for pragmatic trials to generate much needed evidence to guide the care of patients receiving maintenance dialysis, the Kidney Health Initiative assembled a group of individuals with relevant expertise from academia, industry, and government to provide the nephrology community with information about the design and conduct of such trials, with a specific focus on the dialysis setting. Here, we review this information, and where applicable, use experience from the ongoing Time to Reduce Mortality in End Stage Renal Disease Trial, a large cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial evaluating hemodialysis session duration, to illustrate challenges and solutions to operational, ethical, and regulatory issues.

Change in quality of life and one-year mortality risk in maintenance dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QOL) is an important metric of high-quality dialysis care. QOL is commonly measured by the Short Form 36 Questionnaire (SF-36), which provides two summary scores: a mental component score (MCS) and a physical component score (PCS). Poor QOL is associated with mortality in dialysis patients. Small studies show that changes in QOL also predicts mortality. We investigated whether changes in QOL over time are associated with mortality in a large cohort of maintenance hemodialysis patients. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in 1017 outpatient dialysis facilities. Over 10,000 hemodialysis patients completed two SF-36 surveys. We compared 1-year morality rates in those whose MCS or PCS increased or decreased ±5 vs. those whose did not. RESULTS: For those who completed two surveys, mean score for PCS was unchanged, whereas MCS increased slightly (48.6 vs. 48.9, p = 0.05). Individual patients, however, showed marked variation. On the second survey, more than half of patients demonstrated a ± 5 point change in the PCS and/or MCS. After multivariate adjustment, a ≥ 5 decrease in MCS was associated with an increase in mortality (HR = 1.33, 95 % CI 1.18, 1.50). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that many patients experience a significant change in both the MCS and PCS on dialysis. A MCS decrease of ≥5 was associated with increased mortality. More study is needed to determine whether this is a causal relationship. Physicians should evaluate root causes and seek to mitigate declines in QOL whenever possible.

Outcomes among patients receiving in-center, self-care hemodialysis.

Modalities of renal replacement therapy are categorized into incenter hemodialysis and home therapies. A subset of hemodialysis patients referred to as in-center self-care hemodialysis (ICSCHD) receive patient training as if they were going home but instead perform their dialysis in-center with minimal staff support. Preliminary data suggests ICSCHD is associated with better outcomes than traditional in-center hemodialysis. We looked at ICSCHD patients initiating maintenance dialysis from April 1, 2011 to March 30, 2014 and compared them at a 1:2 ratio to propensity-score matched controls from surrounding facilities within the same catchment area. The median follow-up was 14 months. Patients on ICSCHD had lower mortality rate (0.02 vs 0.07 per patient year; p <0.05), fewer hospitalization events (0.82 vs. 1.70 per patient year; p = 0.008) and fewer missed treatments (1.1% vs 3.8% of all treatments; p = 0.005) than matched controls. We concluded that patients on ICSCHD had lower mortality rates and fewer hospital days than well-matched controls and spent more time on dialysis and missed fewer treatments. Establishing a facility-wide.