Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSukul, Nidhi
dc.contributor.authorZhao, Junhui
dc.contributor.authorFuller, Douglas S.
dc.contributor.authorKaraboyas, Angelo
dc.contributor.authorBieber, Brian
dc.contributor.authorSloand, James A.
dc.contributor.authorSubramanian, Lalita
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, David W.
dc.contributor.authorOliver, Matthew J.
dc.contributor.authorTungsanga, Kriang
dc.contributor.authorTomo, Tadashi
dc.contributor.authorMorton, Rachael L.
dc.contributor.authorMorgenstern, Hal
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Bruce M.
dc.contributor.authorPerl, Jeffery
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-03T04:18:43Z
dc.date.available2023-03-03T04:18:43Z
dc.date.issued2019en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/30150
dc.description.abstractBackground Patient-reported measures are increasingly recognized as important predictors of clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis (PD). We sought to understand associations between patient-reported perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of PD and clinical outcomes. Methods In this cohort study, 2760 PD patients in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS) completed a questionnaire on their PD experience, between 2014 and 2017. In this questionnaire, PDOPPS patients rated 17 aspects of their PD experience on a 5-category ordinal scale, with responses scored from − 2 (major disadvantage) to + 2 (major advantage). An advantage/disadvantage score (ADS) was computed for each patient by averaging their response scores. The ADS, along with each of these 17 aspects, were used as exposures. Outcomes included mortality, transition to hemodialysis (HD), patient-reported quality of life (QOL), and depression. Cox regression was used to estimate associations between ADS and mortality, transition to HD, and a composite of the two. Logistic regression with generalized estimating equations was used to estimate cross-sectional associations of ADS with QOL and depression. Results While 7% of PD patients had an ADS < 0 (negative perception of PD), 59% had an ADS between 0 and < 1 (positive perception), and 34% had an ADS ≥1 (very positive perception). Minimal association was observed between mortality and the ADS. Compared with a very positive perception, patients with a negative perception had a higher transition rate to HD (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21, 2.30). Among individual items, “space taken up by PD supplies” was commonly rated as a disadvantage and had the strongest association with transition to HD (HR = 1.28; 95% CI 1.07, 1.53). Lower ADS was strongly associated with worse QOL rating and greater depressive symptoms. Conclusions Although patients reported a generally favorable perception of PD, patient-reported disadvantages were associated with transition to HD, lower QOL, and depression. Strategies addressing these disadvantages, in particular reducing solution storage space, may improve patient outcomes and the experience of PD.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherBMC Nephrologyen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0en
dc.subjectAdvantages and Disadvantagesen
dc.subjectPeritoneal Dialysisen
dc.titlePatient-reported advantages and disadvantages of peritoneal dialysis: results from the PDOPPSen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.subject.asrcAdvantages and Disadvantagesen
dc.identifier.doiDOI: 10.1186/s12882-019-1304-3
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen
usyd.facultyFaculty of Medicine and Healthen
usyd.departmentNHMRC Clinical Trials Centreen
workflow.metadata.onlyNoen


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.