Back to the future: changes in the dialysis delivery model in the UK

Patient Acceptability of the Yorkshire Dialysis Decision Aid (YoDDA) Booklet: A Prospective Non-Randomized Comparison Study Across 6 Predialysis Services

♦

BACKGROUND

Patients are satisfied with their kidney care but want more support in making dialysis choices. Predialysis leaflets vary across services, with few being sufficient to enable patients' informed decision making. We describe the acceptability of a patient decision aid and feasibility of evaluating its effectiveness within usual predialysis practice. ♦

METHODS

Prospective non-randomized comparison design, Usual Care or Usual Care Plus Yorkshire Dialysis Decision Aid Booklet (+YoDDA), in 6 referral centers (Yorkshire-Humber, UK) for patients with sustained deterioration of kidney function. Consenting (C) patients completed questionnaires after predialysis consultation (T1), and 6 weeks later (T2). Measures assessed YoDDA's utility to support patients' decisions and integration within usual care. ♦

RESULTS

Usual Care (n = 105) and +YoDDA (n = 84) participant characteristics were similar: male (62%), white (94%), age (mean = 62.6; standard deviation [SD] 14.4), kidney disease severity (glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] mean = 14.7; SD 3.7); decisional conflict was < 25; choice-preference for home versus hospital dialysis approximately 50:50. Patients valued receiving YoDDA, reading it on their own (96%), and sharing it with family (72%). The +YoDDA participants had higher scores for understanding kidney disease, reasoning about options, feeling in control, sharing their decision with family. Study engagement varied by center (estimated range 14 - 49%; mean 45%); participants varied in completion of decision quality measures. ♦

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving YoDDA as part of predialysis education was valued and useful to patients with worsening kidney disease. Integrating YoDDA actively within predialysis programs will meet clinical guidelines and patient need to support dialysis decision making in the context of patients' lifestyle.

Peritoneal dialysis and in-centre haemodialysis: a cost-utility analysis from a UK payer perspective

BACKGROUND

With limited healthcare resources available, cost-effective provision of dialysis to patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is important.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-effectiveness of varying levels of peritoneal dialysis (PD) use versus current practice among incident ESRD patients requiring dialysis.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of increasing uptake of PD to 39 and 50 % versus current practice of 22 % PD from a UK National Health Service perspective for the year of 2013-2014. A scenario with 5 % PD was also considered. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Five- and 10-year discounted total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient for the current scenario (22 % PD) were £96,307 and 2.104, and £133,339 and 3.301, respectively. Use of PD in 39 % of patients resulted in 5- and 10-year total per-patient cost savings of £3,180 and £4,102 versus current usage alongside total per-patient QALY increases of 0.017 and 0.020. Use of PD in 50 % of patients resulted in 5- and 10-year per-patient cost savings of £5,238 and £6,758 versus current usage alongside per-patient QALY increases of 0.029 and 0.033. Thus, increasing use of PD was associated with marginally better outcomes and lower costs. Cost savings were driven by lower treatment costs and reduced transport requirements for PD versus haemodialysis. Reducing PD use was associated with higher costs and a small reduction in QALYs.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest increasing PD use among incident dialysis patients would be cost-effective, associated with reduced costs and potential modest improvements in quality of life.

Development and Testing of Self-Management Scale for PD Patients

OBJECTIVES

To develop and evaluate the self-management scale for peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.

METHODS

The item pool was formulated based on literature reviews and in-depth interviews. An initial scale containing five factors and 44 items was constructed through two rounds of Delphi expert consultation and a preliminary test. A total of 313 PD patients from the Jiangsu-Zhejiang-Shanghai area were surveyed to test the reliability and validity of the scale.

RESULTS

Five factors, namely solution bag replacement, troubleshooting during operation, diet management, complication monitoring, emotion management and return to social life, were extracted by exploratory factor analysis: the 28 items could explain 64.567% of the total variance; the content validity index was 0.963; the Cronbach's α coefficient and split-half coefficient were 0.926 and 0.960 respectively; and test-retest reliability was 0.937.

CONCLUSION

The scale has been proved to be a reliable and valid tool which allows PD nurses to evaluate the self-management ability of PD patients. The evaluation outcomes can serve as a basis for individualized nursing plans and interventions so as to provide highly effective nursing care.