Outcomes by Dialysis Modality in a Safety-Net Population: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.

IF 3.2 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Kidney360 Pub Date : 2025-03-27 DOI:10.34067/KID.0000000745
Jiten Patel, Anisha P Ganguly, Huzair Ali, Jaspreet Sian, Jillian Smartt, Michael Harms, Ramesh Saxena, Kavita P Bhavan
{"title":"Outcomes by Dialysis Modality in a Safety-Net Population: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Jiten Patel, Anisha P Ganguly, Huzair Ali, Jaspreet Sian, Jillian Smartt, Michael Harms, Ramesh Saxena, Kavita P Bhavan","doi":"10.34067/KID.0000000745","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In-center hemodialysis (HD) is delivered by dialysis providers, while peritoneal dialysis (PD) involves active patient engagement through self-care. This self-care process may be associated with potential collateral health benefits that can positively impact clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Kidney transplantation (KT) is the primary goal among kidney failure (KF) patients. Several studies have shown that PD patients are more likely to receive KT than HD patients; however, baseline socioeconomic differences may confound differences in receipt of KT. Furthermore, differences in KT among low-income dialysis recipients remain uncharacterized. In this retrospective study, we compared transplant evaluation and listing status among propensity-matched incident HD and PD patients within a large safety-net health system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>150 adult PD patients who initiated at Parkland Health from January 2012 to December 2022 were propensity-matched 1:1 with HD patients based on age, race/ethnicity, language, and co-morbidities. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients evaluated for transplantation. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients listed for transplantation, reasons for not listing, proportion transplanted, time to transplant, hospitalization rates, and mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Propensity score-matched HD and PD patients had similar age, distribution of gender, race/ethnicity, language preference, co-morbidities, education, and insurance. Among patients initiated on PD, 129 (86.0%) were evaluated for KT, compared to 105 (70.0%) patients on HD (p=0.001). Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of PD patients than HD patients were ultimately listed for transplantation (51.3% vs. 31.3%, p<0.001). Moreover, 26 (17.3%) HD patients and 33 (22.0%) PD patients underwent KT (p=0.309). The difference in kidney transplant among the two groups was not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this observational study of dialysis patients in a safety-net health system, we observed that more patients on PD were evaluated for transplant than those on HD, leading to higher KT listings of PD patients. These findings suggest that equitable implementation of PD can improve KT evaluation, even among underserved populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":17882,"journal":{"name":"Kidney360","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney360","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34067/KID.0000000745","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In-center hemodialysis (HD) is delivered by dialysis providers, while peritoneal dialysis (PD) involves active patient engagement through self-care. This self-care process may be associated with potential collateral health benefits that can positively impact clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Kidney transplantation (KT) is the primary goal among kidney failure (KF) patients. Several studies have shown that PD patients are more likely to receive KT than HD patients; however, baseline socioeconomic differences may confound differences in receipt of KT. Furthermore, differences in KT among low-income dialysis recipients remain uncharacterized. In this retrospective study, we compared transplant evaluation and listing status among propensity-matched incident HD and PD patients within a large safety-net health system.

Methods: 150 adult PD patients who initiated at Parkland Health from January 2012 to December 2022 were propensity-matched 1:1 with HD patients based on age, race/ethnicity, language, and co-morbidities. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients evaluated for transplantation. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients listed for transplantation, reasons for not listing, proportion transplanted, time to transplant, hospitalization rates, and mortality.

Results: Propensity score-matched HD and PD patients had similar age, distribution of gender, race/ethnicity, language preference, co-morbidities, education, and insurance. Among patients initiated on PD, 129 (86.0%) were evaluated for KT, compared to 105 (70.0%) patients on HD (p=0.001). Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of PD patients than HD patients were ultimately listed for transplantation (51.3% vs. 31.3%, p<0.001). Moreover, 26 (17.3%) HD patients and 33 (22.0%) PD patients underwent KT (p=0.309). The difference in kidney transplant among the two groups was not significant.

Conclusions: In this observational study of dialysis patients in a safety-net health system, we observed that more patients on PD were evaluated for transplant than those on HD, leading to higher KT listings of PD patients. These findings suggest that equitable implementation of PD can improve KT evaluation, even among underserved populations.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Kidney360
Kidney360 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信