Matthew B Rivara1, Rajnish Mehrotra. 1. Kidney Research Institute and Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the changing landscape of home dialysis in the United States over the past decade, including recent research on clinical outcomes in patient undergoing peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, and to describe the impact of recent payment reforms for patients with end-stage renal disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Accumulating evidence supports the conclusion that clinical outcomes for patients treated with peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis are as good as or better than for patients treated with conventional in-center hemodialysis. The recent implementation of the Medicare-expanded prospective payment system for the care of end-stage renal disease patients has resulted in substantial growth in the utilization of peritoneal dialysis in the United States. Utilization of home hemodialysis has also grown, but the contribution of the expanded prospective payment system to this growth is less certain. SUMMARY: Home dialysis, including peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, represents an important alternative to in-center hemodialysis that is effective and patient-centered. Over the coming decade, the growth in the number of end-stage renal disease patient treated with home dialysis modalities should prompt further comparative and cost-effectiveness research, increased attention to racial and ethnic disparities, and investments in home dialysis education for both patients and providers. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/CONH/A13.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the changing landscape of home dialysis in the United States over the past decade, including recent research on clinical outcomes in patient undergoing peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, and to describe the impact of recent payment reforms for patients with end-stage renal disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Accumulating evidence supports the conclusion that clinical outcomes for patients treated with peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis are as good as or better than for patients treated with conventional in-center hemodialysis. The recent implementation of the Medicare-expanded prospective payment system for the care of end-stage renal diseasepatients has resulted in substantial growth in the utilization of peritoneal dialysis in the United States. Utilization of home hemodialysis has also grown, but the contribution of the expanded prospective payment system to this growth is less certain. SUMMARY: Home dialysis, including peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, represents an important alternative to in-center hemodialysis that is effective and patient-centered. Over the coming decade, the growth in the number of end-stage renal diseasepatient treated with home dialysis modalities should prompt further comparative and cost-effectiveness research, increased attention to racial and ethnic disparities, and investments in home dialysis education for both patients and providers. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/CONH/A13.
Authors: Robert P Pauly; Katerina Maximova; Jennifer Coppens; Reem A Asad; Andreas Pierratos; Paul Komenda; Michael Copland; Gihad E Nesrallah; Adeera Levin; Anne Chery; Christopher T Chan Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-07-29 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Eduardo Lacson; Weiling Wang; Cari DeVries; Keith Leste; Raymond M Hakim; Michael Lazarus; Joseph Pulliam Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2011-06-12 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Carl Kjellstrand; Umberto Buoncristiani; George Ting; Jules Traeger; Giorgina B Piccoli; Roula Sibai-Galland; Bessie A Young; Christopher R Blagg Journal: Hemodial Int Date: 2010-09-20 Impact factor: 1.812
Authors: Edwina A Brown; Lina Johansson; Ken Farrington; Hugh Gallagher; Tom Sensky; Fabiana Gordon; Maria Da Silva-Gane; Nigel Beckett; Mary Hickson Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2010-04-16 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Kirsten L Johansen; Rebecca Zhang; Yijian Huang; Shu-Cheng Chen; Christopher R Blagg; Alexander S Goldfarb-Rumyantzev; Chistopher D Hoy; Robert S Lockridge; Brent W Miller; Paul W Eggers; Nancy G Kutner Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2009-08-19 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: David C Mendelssohn; Salim K Mujais; Steven D Soroka; John Brouillette; Tomoko Takano; Paul E Barre; Bharati V Mittal; Ajay Singh; Catherine Firanek; Ken Story; Fredric O Finkelstein Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2008-08-28 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Mitchell H Rosner; Susie Q Lew; Paul Conway; Jennifer Ehrlich; Robert Jarrin; Uptal D Patel; Karen Rheuban; R Brooks Robey; Neal Sikka; Eric Wallace; Patrick Brophy; James Sloand Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Annie-Claire Nadeau-Fredette; Carmel M Hawley; Elaine M Pascoe; Christopher T Chan; Philip A Clayton; Kevan R Polkinghorne; Neil Boudville; Martine Leblanc; David W Johnson Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Rajnish Mehrotra; Melissa Soohoo; Matthew B Rivara; Jonathan Himmelfarb; Alfred K Cheung; Onyebuchi A Arah; Allen R Nissenson; Vanessa Ravel; Elani Streja; Sooraj Kuttykrishnan; Ronit Katz; Miklos Z Molnar; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Matthew B Rivara; Melissa Soohoo; Elani Streja; Miklos Z Molnar; Connie M Rhee; Alfred K Cheung; Ronit Katz; Onyebuchi A Arah; Allen R Nissenson; Jonathan Himmelfarb; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Rajnish Mehrotra Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-01-04 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Philip Kam-Tao Li; Kai Ming Chow; Moniek W M Van de Luijtgaarden; David W Johnson; Kitty J Jager; Rajnish Mehrotra; Sarala Naicker; Roberto Pecoits-Filho; Xue Qing Yu; Norbert Lameire Journal: Nat Rev Nephrol Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 28.314