Home-Based Dialysis: A Primer for the Internist.

Home-based dialysis modalities offer both clinical and practical advantages to patients. The use of the home-based modalities, peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, has been increasing over the past decade after a long period of decline. Given the increasing frequency of use of these types of dialysis, it is important for clinicians to be familiar with how these types of dialysis are performed and key clinical aspects of care related to their use in patients with end-stage kidney disease.

Outcomes of Integrated Home Dialysis Care: Results From the Canadian Organ Replacement Register.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The integrated home dialysis model proposes the initiation of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and a timely transition to home hemodialysis (HHD) after PD ends. We compared the outcomes of patients transitioning from PD to HHD with those initiating KRT with HHD. STUDY DESIGN: Observational analysis of the Canadian Organ Replacement Register (CORR). SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: All patients who initiated PD or HHD within the first 90 days of KRT between 2005 and 2018. EXPOSURE: Patients transitioning from PD to HHD (PD+HHD group) versus patients initiating KRT with HHD (HHD group). OUTCOME: (1) A composite of all-cause mortality and modality transfer (to in-center hemodialysis or PD for 90 days) and (2) all hospitalizations (considered as recurrent events). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: A propensity score analysis for which PD+HHD patients were matched 1:1 to (1) incident HHD patients ("incident-match" analysis) or (2) HHD patients with a KRT vintage at least equivalent to the vintage of PD+HHD patients at the transition time ("vintage-matched" analysis). Cause-specific hazards models (composite outcome) and shared frailty models (hospitalization) were used to compare groups. RESULTS: Among 63,327 individuals in the CORR, 163 PD+HHD patients (median of 1.9 years in PD) and 711 HHD patients were identified. In the incident-match analysis, compared to the HHD patients, the PD+HHD group had a similar risk of the composite outcome (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.58-1.32]) and hospitalizations (HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.76-1.41]). In the vintage-match analysis, PD+HHD patients had a lower hazard for the composite outcome (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.40-0.94]) but a similar hospitalization risk (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.59-1.24]). LIMITATIONS: Risk of survivor bias in the PD+HHD cohort and residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Controlling for KRT vintage, the patients transitioning from PD to HHD had better clinical outcomes than the incident HHD patients. These data support the use of integrated home dialysis for patients initiating home-based KRT. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The integrated home dialysis model proposes the initiation of dialysis with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and subsequent transition to home hemodialysis (HHD) once PD is no longer feasible. It allows patients to benefit from initial lifestyle advantages of PD and to continue home-based treatments after its termination. However, some patients may prefer to initiate dialysis with HHD from the outset. In this study, we compared the long-term clinical outcomes of both approaches using a large Canadian dialysis register. We found that both options led to a similar risk of hospitalization. In contrast, the PD-to-HHD model led to improved survival when controlling for the duration of kidney failure.

Direct Transition from Hospital to Home Dialysis: Revolutionizing Home Dialysis Training.

A large portion of new patients with end stage kidney disease initiates dialysis in the acute setting and continue with outpatient dialysis at in-center facilities. To increase home dialysis adoption, programs have successfully operationalized Urgent Start peritoneal dialysis to have patients avoid in-center dialysis and move straight to home. However, Urgent Start home hemodialysis (HHD) has not been a realistic option for providers or patients due to complex machines and long training times (greater than four weeks). The landscape of dialysis treatment is evolving, and innovative approaches are being explored to improve patient outcomes and optimize health care resources. This article delves into the concept of directly transitioning incident patients from hospital admission to HHD, bypassing traditional in-center dialysis training. This forward-thinking approach aims to empower patients, enhance their treatment experience, maximize efficiency, and streamline health care operations. A large hospital organization in the Northeast was able to successfully transition three patients from hospital "crash" starts on hemodialysis directly to HHD.

Value of an Integrated Home Dialysis Model in the United Kingdom: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the lifetime cost-effectiveness of increasing home hemodialysis as a treatment option for patients experiencing peritoneal dialysis technique failure compared with the current standard of care. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to assess the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and cost-effectiveness of increasing the usage an integrated home dialysis model compared with the current patient pathways in the United Kingdom. A secondary analysis was conducted including only the cost difference in treatments, minimizing the impact of the high cost of dialysis during life-years gained. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed, including analyses from a societal rather than a National Health Service perspective. RESULTS: The base-case probabilistic analysis was associated with incremental costs of £3413 and a quality-adjusted life-year of 0.09, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £36 341. The secondary analysis found the integrated home dialysis model to be dominant. Conclusions on cost-effectiveness did not change under the societal perspective in either analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The base-case analysis found that an integrated home dialysis model compared with current patient pathways is likely not cost-effective. These results were primarily driven by the high baseline costs of dialysis during life-years gained by patients receiving home hemodialysis. When excluding baseline dialysis-related treatment costs, the integrated home dialysis model was dominant. New strategies in kidney care patient pathway management should be explored because, under the assumption that dialysis should be funded, the results provide cost-effectiveness evidence for an integrated home dialysis model.

Vancomycin and daptomycin dosing recommendations in patients receiving home hemodialysis using Monte Carlo simulation.

BACKGROUND: Few drug dosing recommendations for patients receiving home hemodialysis (HHD) have been published which has hindered the adoption of HHD. HHD regimens vary widely and differ considerably from conventional, thrice weekly, in-center hemodialysis in terms of treatment frequency, duration and blood and dialysate flow rates. Consequently, vancomycin and daptomycin clearances in HHD are also likely to be different, consequently HHD dosing regimens must be developed to ensure efficacy and minimize toxicity when these antibiotics are used. Many HHD regimens are used clinically, this study modeled ten common HHD regimens and determined optimal vancomycin and daptomycin dosing for each HHD regimen. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations using pharmacokinetic data derived from the literature and demographic data from a large HHD program treating patients with end stage kidney disease were incorporated into a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model. Virtual vancomycin and daptomycin doses were administered post-HHD and drug exposures were determined in 5,000 virtual patients receiving ten different HHD regimens. Serum concentration monitoring with subsequent dose changes was incorporated into the vancomycin models. Pharmacodynamic target attainment rates were determined for each studied dose. The lowest possible doses that met predefined targets in virtual patients were chosen as optimal doses. RESULTS: HHD frequency, total dialysate volumes and HHD durations influenced drug exposure and led to different dosing regimens to meet targets. Antibiotic dosing regimens were identified that could meet targets for 3- and 7-h HHD regimens occurring every other day or 4-5 days/week. HHD regimens with 3-day interdialytic periods required higher doses prior to the 3-day period. The addition of vancomycin serum concentration monitoring allowed for calculation of necessary dosing changes which increased the number of virtual subjects meeting pharmacodynamic targets. CONCLUSIONS: Doses of vancomycin and daptomycin that will meet desired pharmacodynamic targets in HHD are dependent on patient and HHD-specific factors. Doses used in conventional thrice weekly hemodialysis are unlikely to meet treatment goals. The antibiotic regimens paired with the HHD parameters studied in this analysis are likely to meet goals but require clinical validation.

Home hemodialysis technique survival: insights and challenges.

Home hemodialysis (HHD) offers several clinical, quality of life and cost-saving benefits for patients with end-stage kidney disease. While uptake of this modality has increased in recent years, its prevalence remains low and high rates of discontinuation remain a challenge. This comprehensive narrative review aims to better understand what is currently known about technique survival in HHD patients, elucidate the clinical factors that contribute to attrition and expand on possible strategies to prevent discontinuation. With increasing efforts to encourage home modalities, it is imperative to better understand technique survival and find strategies to help maintain patients on the home therapy of their choosing. It is crucial to better target high-risk patients, examine ideal training practices and identify practices that are potentially modifiable to improve technique survival.

Successful Home Hemodialysis Programs: An Exploration of Key Nursing Care Processes.

The aim of this qualitative study was to identify nursing processes of care that help keep patients successfully on home hemodialysis (HHD). A qualitative descriptive approach using appreciative inquiry was used as the framework for data collection and analysis. Four focus groups were held with HHD nursing teams in the Province of Ontario, Canada. Results suggest that successful HHD teams have highly performing nurses who work cohesively as a team, and have consistent structures and processes in place for patient education and follow up. A culture of success has the potential to keep patients successfully on HHD, improve nurse job satisfaction, and retain highly functioning and specialized nursing staff. Quality improvement initiatives aimed at improving rates of HHD are important given the benefits to patients of HHD as a treatment modality.

Registered Nurse in Home Dialysis Therapies and Future Implications.

With an increased emphasis on home dialysis therapies (HDTs), and to ensure nephrology nurses have a voice in health policy discussions and decisions, the American Nephrology Nurses Association (ANNA) initiated the Home Dialysis Therapies Task Force. ANNA fully supports the increased utilization of HDTs and wants to ensure every individual has the option of HDT and deserves an RN in their care. Careful consideration must be given to the impact of legislative initiatives aimed at the nursing shortage and increasing the use of HDTs on delivery of safe care and RN practice. The HDT Task Force implemented a Think Tank to explore and delineate the role of nephrology RNs in HDT to ensure a safe and informed transition to HDT for individuals with kidney failure. The mission was to gather and analyze information on the role of the nephrology RN in HDTs, clarify RN-specific tasks versus tasks that may be delegated to support staff, and gather and gain insight into barriers to HDTs.

Mortality After Home Hemodialysis Treatment Failure and Return to In-Center Hemodialysis.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Patients on home hemodialysis (HHD) may eventually return to in-center hemodialysis (ICHD) for clinical, technical, or psychosocial reasons. We studied the mortality of patients returning to ICHD after HHD, comparing it with the mortality experience among patients receiving HHD and patients receiving ICHD without prior treatment with HHD. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: All patients represented in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) who commenced HD during 2005-2015 and were treated for >90 days. EXPOSURE: ICHD and/or HHD, and clinical characteristics at study entry. OUTCOME: Mortality and cause of death. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: A time-varying multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis with shared frailty was implemented to explore the association between patient treatment states and mortality. Patients were censored at the time of transplantation or change in treatment modality to peritoneal dialysis. RESULTS: A total of 19,306 patients initiated HD and were treated for >90 days. The mean age of patients was 60.8 ± 15.4 (SD) years, 62% were male, and 49% had diabetes. After HHD treatment failure, adjusted mortality was increased compared with continued HHD at 0-30 days (HR, 3.93 [95% CI, 2.09-7.40]; P < 0.001), 30-90 days (HR, 3.34 [95% CI, 1.98-5.62]; P < 0.001), and >90 days (HR, 2.29 [95% CI, 1.84-2.85]; P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Covariates recorded at dialysis initiation, residual confounding underlying successful initiation of HHD treatment, and observational data lacking detail on cause of HHD treatment failure. CONCLUSIONS: HHD treatment failure is associated with a significant increase in mortality compared with continued HHD. This risk was present in both the early (first 30 days and 30-90 days) and late (>90 days) periods after HHD treatment failure. Further investigation into the specific causes of treatment failure and death may highlight specific high-risk patients.

Integrating Patient Activation Into Dialysis Care.

Patient activation, the measure of patients' readiness and willingness to manage their own health care, is low among people receiving in-center hemodialysis, which is exacerbated because such centers are commonly set up for patients to passively receive care. In our pursuit of person-centered care and value-based medicine, enabling patients to take a more active role in their care can lead to healthy behaviors, with subsequent reductions in individual burden and costs to the health care system. To improve patient activation, we need to embrace a patient-first approach and combine it with ways to equip patients to thrive with self-management. This requires changes in the training of the health care team as well as changes in care delivery models, promoting interventions such as health coaching and peer mentoring, while leveraging technology to enable self-access to records, self-monitoring, and communication with providers. We also need health care policies that encourage a focus on patient-identified goals, including more attention to patient-reported outcomes. In this article, we review the current status of patient activation in dialysis patients, outline some of the available interventions, and propose steps to change the dynamics of the current system to move toward a more active role for patients in their care.

What Total Body Water Measurement Should Be Used for Prescribing the Dialysis Dose in Low-Flow Home Daily Dialysis?

INTRODUCTION: In low-flow home daily dialysis (HDD), the dialysis dose is evaluated from the total body water (TBW). TBW can be estimated by anthropometric methods or bioimpedance spectroscopy. METHODS: A multicentric cross-sectional study of patients in HDD for >3 months was conducted to assess the correlation and the difference between the anthropometric estimate of TBW (Watson-TBW) and the bioimpedance estimate (BIS-TBW) and to analyse the impact on the dialysate volume prescribed. RESULTS: Forty patients from 10 centres were included. The median BIS-TBW and Watson-TBW were 35.1 (29.1-41.4 L) and 36.9 (32-42.4 L), respectively. The 2 methods had a good correlation (r = 0.87, p < 0.05). However, Bland-Altman analysis showed an overestimation of TBW with Watson's formula, with a bias of 2.77 L. For 4, 5, or 6 sessions per week, the use of Watson-TBW increases the dialysate prescription per week by 100 L, 45 L, or 10 L, respectively, over our entire cohort. There is no increase in the volume of dialysate prescribed with the 7 sessions per week schedule. CONCLUSION: BIS-TBW and Watson-TBW estimation have a good correlation; however, Watson's equation overestimates TBW. This overestimation is negligible for a prescription frequency of >5 sessions per week.

The initial attempt at home hemodialysis in mainland China.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have shown home hemodialysis (HHD) to be associated with better survival than facility hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). Patients on HHD have reported higher quality of life and independence. HHD is considered to be an economical way to manage end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has had a significant impact on patients with ESKD. Patients on HHD may have an advantage over in-center HD patients because of a lower risk of exposure to infection. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We enrolled HD patients from our dialysis center. We first established the HHD training center. The training center was approved by the Chinese government. Doctors, nurses and engineers train and assess patients separately. There are three forms of patient monitoring: home visits, internet remote monitoring, and outpatient services. Demographic and medical data included age, sex, blood pressure, and dialysis-related data. Laboratory tests were conducted in our central testing laboratory, including hemoglobin (Hgb), serum creatinine (Cr), urea nitrogen (BUN), uric acid (UA), albumin (Alb), calcium (Ca), phosphorus (P), parathyroid hormone (PTH), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels. RESULTS: Six patients who underwent regular dialysis in the HD center of our hospital were selected for HHD training. We enrolled 6 patients, including 4 males and 2 females. The mean age of the patients was 47.5 (34.7-55.7) years, and the mean dialysis age was 33.5 (11.2-41.5) months. After an average of 16.0 (11.2-25.5) months of training, Alb, P and BNP levels were improved compared with the baseline values. After training, three patients returned home to begin independent HD. During the follow-up, there were no serious adverse events leading to hospitalization or death, but there were several adverse events. They were solved quickly by extra home visits of the technicians or online by remote monitoring. During the follow-up time, the laboratory indicators of all the patients, including Hgb, Alb, Ca, P, PTH, BNP, and ß2-MG levels, remained stable before and after HHD treatment. CONCLUSION: HHD is feasible and safe for ESKD in China, but larger-scale and longer-term studies are needed for further confirmation.

Barriers to Dialysis Home Therapy Utilization: A Systematic Review.

Barriers to the utilization of home therapy among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) impact progression to kidney failure and access to treatment options. The impact of health disparities on home therapy utilization receiving kidney replacement therapy requires investigation. A systematic review utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted to examine health disparity barriers to home therapy utilization among patients with kidney failure. Twelve articles published from 2010-2020 identified relationships between health disparities and home dialysis utilization among adults receiving kidney replacement therapy. Findings included association between the utilization of home therapy and the barriers of race/ethnicity (n = 5), economic barriers (n = 4), and insurance type (n = 3). Implications of findings are provided.

Home Hemodialysis: Core Curriculum 2021.

In the early days of dialysis, because of a lack of existing in-center infrastructure, home hemodialysis (HHD) was frequently used to expand dialysis programs. Recently, HHD has been thrust into the spotlight of kidney care programs once again. Patients and policymakers are demanding more choices for the management of kidney failure while controlling for cost. Perhaps it is not surprising that the kidney community's interest in HHD has been revived, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. To meet this increased interest and demand, nephrologists and dialysis providers must embrace new technologies and improve their understanding of HHD systems. This installment of AJKD's Core Curriculum in Nephrology seeks to inform the reader about factors that can improve success in the training and retention of HHD patients. Benefits, pitfalls, and challenges of HHD are outlined. The features of novel and commonly used HHD equipment are also summarized. Examples of prescriptions and prescription adjustments to meet the needs of patients will also be reviewed. Finally, considerations related to medical management of HHD patients and their dialysis access at home are also included. HHD is an important tool for the management and rehabilitation of patients with kidney failure, which allows for patient-centered care and increased patient choice.

Telehealth for Home Dialysis in COVID-19 and Beyond: A Perspective From the American Society of Nephrology COVID-19 Home Dialysis Subcommittee.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, technological advancements, regulatory waivers, and user acceptance have converged to boost telehealth activities. Due to the state of emergency, regulatory waivers in the United States have made it possible for providers to deliver and bill for services across state lines for new and established patients through Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)- and non-HIPAA-compliant platforms with home as the originating site and without geographic restrictions. Platforms have been developed or purchased to perform videoconferencing, and interdisciplinary dialysis teams have adapted to perform virtual visits. Telehealth experiences and challenges encountered by dialysis providers, clinicians, nurses, and patients have exposed health care disparities in areas such as access to care, bandwidth connectivity, availability of devices to perform telehealth, and socioeconomic and language barriers. Future directions in telehealth use, quality measures, and research in telehealth use need to be explored. Telehealth during the public health emergency has changed the practice of health care, with the post-COVID-19 world unlikely to resemble the prior era. The future impact of telehealth in patient care in the United States remains to be seen, especially in the context of the Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative.

Perceptions of Home Dialysis Training and Experience Among US Nephrology Fellows.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Prior research suggests a lack of confidence among graduating US nephrology trainees in implementing both peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD). Gaps in fellowship training may represent an obstacle to achieving the Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative's goal of increasing the use of home dialysis. We sought to identify the strengths of and limitations in home dialysis training. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study surveying nephrology trainees regarding their confidence with home dialysis management and perceptions of home dialysis educational resources provided by their training program. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: A paper survey was distributed to 110 nephrology trainees with at least 1 year of nephrology fellowship training who attended any 1 of 3 home dialysis conferences. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Data were summarized as percentages. χ2, Fisher exact, and Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests were used for statistical analysis. OUTCOME: Self-perception of readiness to manage PD and HHD patients. RESULTS: 76 of 110 (66%) attendees completed the survey. Most respondents were moderately confident regarding principles of PD. However, only 3% had initiated patients on "urgent-start PD" and 11% observed a PD catheter insertion. The level of confidence for HHD was low. Most trainees attended a home dialysis continuity clinic with mentorship from faculty. LIMITATIONS: A small number of participants and the inability to verify respondent-provided data for the number of PD and HHD patients seen and clinics attended. Potential lack of generalizability owing to inclusion of only trainees who attended a home dialysis conference. CONCLUSIONS: Nephrology trainees perceive low and moderate levels of preparedness for managing HHD and PD, respectively. Educational innovation and optimization of resources at both the institutional and national levels may improve confidence and promote public policy goals regarding home dialysis therapies.

Multicenter registry analysis comparing survival on home hemodialysis and kidney transplant recipients in Australia and New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: In the era of organ shortage, home hemodialysis (HHD) has been identified as the possible preferential bridge to kidney transplantation. Data are conflicting regarding the comparability of HHD and transplantation outcomes. This study aimed to compare patient and treatment survival between HHD patients and kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry was used to include incident HHD patients on Day 90 after initiation of kidney replacement therapy and first kidney-only transplant recipients in Australia and New Zealand from 1997 to 2017. Survival times were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method comparing HHD patients with subtypes of kidney transplant recipients using the log-rank test. Adjusted analyses were performed with multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models for time to all-cause mortality. Time-to-treatment failure or death was assessed as a composite secondary outcome. RESULTS: The study compared 1411 HHD patients with 4960 living donor (LD) recipients, 6019 standard criteria donor (SCD) recipients and 2427 expanded criteria donor (ECD) recipients. While LD and SCD recipients had reduced risks of mortality compared with HHD patients [LD adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.71; SCD HR = 0.65 95% CI 0.52-0.79], the risk of mortality was comparable between ECD recipients and HHD patients (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.73-1.12). LD, SCD and ECD kidney recipients each experienced superior time-to-treatment failure or death compared with HHD patients. CONCLUSIONS: This large registry study showed that kidney transplant offers a survival benefit compared with HHD but that this advantage is not significant for ECD recipients.

Home Dialysis: A Majority Chooses It, a Minority Gets It.

INTRODUCTION: When choosing a modality for outpatient renal replacement therapy, patients and medical providers have 3 options to choose from in-center hemodialysis (HD), home HD (HHD), and peritoneal dialysis (PD). In 2017, just over 10% of incident ESKD patients were on a home dialysis modality. We set out to determine outcomes of dialysis modality education in both pre-dialysis and dialysis patients. Moreover, we examined barriers that preclude patients from choosing home dialysis. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective study looking at patients who were referred to the CKD educator for dialysis modality education between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Patient demographics, preferred language of communication, stage of renal disease, and reasons for patients' refusal to undertake a home dialysis modality were recorded. Patients' average household income and driving distance to our home dialysis unit were calculated using their home zip code. RESULTS: 167 patients were referred for CKD education. Mean age was 60 years, and 59% male, 42% African American, 22% White, 7% Asian, and 28% were Hispanic or Latino. Only 23% of the total cohort chose in-center HD, while 74% chose a home dialysis modality (59% PD and 15% HHD), and the remaining patients remained undecided. 56% of in-center HD patients chose a home dialysis modality. The most commonly cited barriers to home dialysis were lack of a care partner, lack of home space, and patient preference. LIMITATIONS: Over 90% of our patients reside in NY City where home space is limited. We require in our home HD program that patients have a trained care partner present during their treatments. We cannot assume that all CKD stage-4 patients or higher were either referred for CKD education or followed through on the referral. CONCLUSIONS: A large discrepancy between informed patients' choices and the reality of the current dialysis landscape. Absence of a care partner, lack of home space, and patients not deemed appropriate surgical candidates were the main driving forces in their not opting for a home modality.

Overcoming Barriers for Uptake and Continued Use of Home Dialysis: An NKF-KDOQI Conference Report.

Home dialysis modalities are used in a minority of patients with kidney failure in the United States. During the 2018 National Kidney Foundation-Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-KDOQI) Home Dialysis Conference, numerous ideas were suggested to help minimize barriers for the uptake and retention of home dialysis therapies. First, educational tools are needed to increase knowledge about home dialysis modalities (eg, continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis, continuous cycling peritoneal dialysis, and home hemodialysis). Implementation of a hub and spoke model, pairing smaller and/or newer home dialysis programs with larger more sophisticated programs that offer education and mentoring, may help dialysis programs to grow and prosper. This pairing can be facilitated by traditional conferences and newer modalities such as telemedicine and training applications. Peer support to patients, such as that offered through the NKF Peers Program, and support and respite to care partners can have beneficial effects toward both increasing the number of patients who choose home dialysis as a modality and improving retention in home dialysis programs. Anticipating and understanding both patient and care partner burden is important for the development and implementation of patient- and care partner-centered support programs that can be deployed before a patient ceases home therapy. Finally, aligning Medicare reimbursement to support appropriate increased home dialysis uptake to prioritize both transplantation and home dialysis as the first-line treatments for kidney failure.

Comparing Patient Survival of Home Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Patients.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD) have similar outcomes, and little is known about how mortality associated with HHD versus PD differs according to the duration of dialysis. METHODS: We examined a national cohort of incident end-stage renal disease patients that was comprised of 1,993 and 16,514 patients transitioning to HHD and PD, respectively, from 2007 to 2011. The HHD patients were matched with PD patients using propensity score (PS). Demographics, comorbidities, duration of dialysis, and body mass index were adjusted for in logistic regression models using PS matching. We matched 1,915 HHD patients with 1,915 PD patients based on the PS. The patients were categorized by their vintage (duration of dialysis) at the time of the transition to HHD or PD (<3, 3 to <12, and ≥12 months). RESULTS: In the matched cohort, 237 and 359 deaths occurred in the HHD and PD patients, respectively (cumulative incidence 9.6 vs. 12.9/100 patient-years, p < 0.001). PD patients who transitioned within 12 months of starting dialysis had similar mortality risks, while PD patients who transitioned >12 months after starting dialysis had an 83% higher risk for mortality (hazard ratio 1.83; 95% CI 1.33-2.52). CONCLUSIONS: Whereas there was no meaningful survival difference in the first 12 months between HHD and PD, patients who transitioned to PD after 12 months of dialysis had worse survival than their HHD counterparts. Additional studies are warranted to investigate clinical implications of these differences.