BackgroundHome haemodialysis is associated with improved survival and quality of life in uncontrolled studies. However, relative benefits and harms of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are uncertain.ObjectivesTo evaluate the benefits and harms of home haemodialysis versus in-centre haemodialysis in adults with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD).Search methodsThe Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register was searched up to 31 October 2014.Selection criteriaRCTs of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in adults with ESKD were included.Data collection and analysisData were extracted by two investigators independently. Study risk of bias and other patient-centred outcomeswere extracted. Insufficient data were available to conduct meta-analyses.Main resultsWe identified a single cross-over RCT (enrolling 9 participants) that compared home haemodialysis (long hours: 6 to 8 hours, 3 times/ week) with in-centre haemodialysis (short hours: 3.5 to 4.5 hours, 3 times/weeks) for 8 weeks in prevalent home haemodialysis patients. Outcome data were limited and not available for the end of the first phase of treatment in this cross-over study which was at risk of bias due to differences in dialysate composition between the two treatment comparisons.Overall, home haemodialysis reduced 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure and improved uraemic symptoms, but increased treatmentrelated burden of disease and interference in social activities. Insufficient data were available for mortality, hospitalisation or dialysis vascular access complications or treatment durability.Authors' conclusionsInsufficient randomised datawere available to determine the effects of home haemodialysis on survival, hospitalisation, and quality of life compared with in-centre haemodialysis. Given the consistently observed benefits of home haemodialysis on quality of life and survival in uncontrolled studies, and the low prevalence of home haemodialysis globally, randomised studies evaluating home haemodialysis would help inform clinical practice and policy.

Home versus in-centre haemodialysis for end-stage kidney disease

Strippoli G.
2014

Abstract

BackgroundHome haemodialysis is associated with improved survival and quality of life in uncontrolled studies. However, relative benefits and harms of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are uncertain.ObjectivesTo evaluate the benefits and harms of home haemodialysis versus in-centre haemodialysis in adults with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD).Search methodsThe Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register was searched up to 31 October 2014.Selection criteriaRCTs of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in adults with ESKD were included.Data collection and analysisData were extracted by two investigators independently. Study risk of bias and other patient-centred outcomeswere extracted. Insufficient data were available to conduct meta-analyses.Main resultsWe identified a single cross-over RCT (enrolling 9 participants) that compared home haemodialysis (long hours: 6 to 8 hours, 3 times/ week) with in-centre haemodialysis (short hours: 3.5 to 4.5 hours, 3 times/weeks) for 8 weeks in prevalent home haemodialysis patients. Outcome data were limited and not available for the end of the first phase of treatment in this cross-over study which was at risk of bias due to differences in dialysate composition between the two treatment comparisons.Overall, home haemodialysis reduced 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure and improved uraemic symptoms, but increased treatmentrelated burden of disease and interference in social activities. Insufficient data were available for mortality, hospitalisation or dialysis vascular access complications or treatment durability.Authors' conclusionsInsufficient randomised datawere available to determine the effects of home haemodialysis on survival, hospitalisation, and quality of life compared with in-centre haemodialysis. Given the consistently observed benefits of home haemodialysis on quality of life and survival in uncontrolled studies, and the low prevalence of home haemodialysis globally, randomised studies evaluating home haemodialysis would help inform clinical practice and policy.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11586/243525
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 9
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 11
social impact