| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Articles |
Division of Nephrology, University of Toronto, Canada.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the opinions and attitudes of Canadian nephrologists about dialysis modality decisions and optimal dialysis system design. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the Canadian Society of Nephrology. INTERVENTION: A mailed survey questionnaire. RESULTS: A 66% response rate was obtained. Decisions about modality are reported to be based most strongly on patient preference (4.4 on a scale from 1 to 5), followed by quality of life (4.06), morbidity (3.97), mortality (3.85), and rehabilitation (3.69), while neither facility (1.78) nor physician (1.62) reimbursement are important. When asked about the current relative utilization of each modality, nephrologists felt that hospital-based hemodialysis (HD) is slightly overutilized (2.53), continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is about right (3.00), while cycler peritoneal dialysis (PD) (3.53), community-based full (3.83) and self-care HD (3.91), and home HD (4.02) are underutilized. A hypothetical question about optimal distribution to maximize survival revealed that a type of HD should constitute 62.8% of the mix, with more emphasis on cycler PD (14.9%), community-based full care HD (13.8%), self-care HD (14.5%), and home HD (9.0%) than is current practice. However, when the goal was to maximize cost effectiveness, HD fell slightly to 57.8%. CONCLUSIONS: These survey results suggest that the current national average 66%/34% HD/PD ratio is reasonable. However, there appears to be a consensus that Canada could evolve to a more cost-effective, community-based dialysis system without compromising patient outcomes.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D. C. Mendelssohn, S. K. Mujais, S. D. Soroka, J. Brouillette, T. Takano, P. E. Barre, B. V. Mittal, A. Singh, C. Firanek, K. Story, et al. A prospective evaluation of renal replacement therapy modality eligibility Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 28, 2008; (2008) gfn484v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. M. Just, F. Th. de Charro, E. A. Tschosik, L. L. Noe, S. K. Bhattacharyya, and M. C. Riella Reimbursement and economic factors influencing dialysis modality choice around the world Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 1, 2008; 23(7): 2365 - 2373. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Lambie, H. C. Rayner, J. L. Bragg-Gresham, R. L. Pisoni, V. E. Andreucci, B. Canaud, F. K. Port, and E. W. Young Starting and withdrawing haemodialysis--associations between nephrologists' opinions, patient characteristics and practice patterns (data from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study) Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., October 1, 2006; 21(10): 2814 - 2820. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. S. MacGregor, J. W. M. Agar, and C. R. Blagg Home haemodialysis--international trends and variation Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 1, 2006; 21(7): 1934 - 1945. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Goovaerts, M. Jadoul, and E. Goffin Influence of a Pre-Dialysis Education Programme (PDEP) on the mode of renal replacement therapy Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., September 1, 2005; 20(9): 1842 - 1847. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-P. Wauters and D. Uehlinger Non-medical factors influencing peritoneal dialysis utilization: the Swiss experience Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2004; 19(6): 1363 - 1367. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. V. Jassal, G. Krishna, N. P. Mallick, and D. C. Mendelssohn Attitudes of British Isles nephrologists towards dialysis modality selection: a questionnaire study Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., March 1, 2002; 17(3): 474 - 477. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
 |
