Outcomes in patients on home haemodialysis in England and Wales, 1997–2005: a comparative cohort analysis

Nitsch, Dorothea, Steenkamp, Retha, Tomson, Charles R.V., Roderick, Paul, Ansell, David and MacGregor, Mark S. (2010) Outcomes in patients on home haemodialysis in England and Wales, 1997–2005: a comparative cohort analysis Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation, 26, (5), pp. 1670-1677. (doi:10.1093/ndt/gfq561).


Full text not available from this repository.


Background: The UK national policy promotes expansion of home haemodialysis, but there are no recent data on characteristics and outcomes of a national home haemodialysis population.

Methods: We compared incident home haemodialysis patients in England and Wales (n = 225, 1997–2005) with age- and sex-matched incident peritoneal dialysis, hospital haemodialysis and satellite haemodialysis patients with follow-up until 31 December 2006. Cox regression analyses included time-dependent changes of wait-listing for transplantation (a proxy for health status), start of home haemodialysis and transplantation.

Results: There was a median delay of 12 months between starting renal replacement therapy (RRT) and home haemodialysis. During that first year of RRT, >?50% of home haemodialysis patients were wait-listed for kidney transplantation; hospital haemodialysis patients had a lower rate of wait-listing over time [hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44–0.70; P < 0.001]. In crude analyses, there was a marked survival advantage of home haemodialysis patients compared with other modalities (log-rank P-value < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, being on home haemodialysis yielded a long-term survival benefit compared with peritoneal dialysis (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40–0.93), and a borderline advantage compared with hospital haemodialysis (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44–1.03). There was no evidence of an advantage compared with satellite haemodialysis (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65–1.37).

Conclusions: Home haemodialysis patients have better survival compared with other dialysis modalities. Some of this crude survival advantage is due to selection of a healthier patient cohort as evidenced by higher transplant wait-listing rates. The advantage over peritoneal dialysis persisted after adjustment for wait-listing and transplantation over time.

Item Type: Article
Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi:10.1093/ndt/gfq561
ISSNs: 0931-0509 (print)
Organisations: Primary Care & Population Sciences
ePrint ID: 164113
Date :
Date Event
14 September 2010e-pub ahead of print
Date Deposited: 21 Sep 2010 09:27
Last Modified: 18 Apr 2017 03:42
Further Information:Google Scholar
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/164113

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item