K Griva1,2, C S Goh3, W C A Kang3, Z L Yu3, M C Chan4, S Y Wu4, T Krishnasamy4, M Foo4. 1. Department of Psychology, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link AS402/28, Singapore, 117570, Singapore. psygk@nus.edu.sg. 2. Health Services Research Group, City University, London, UK. psygk@nus.edu.sg. 3. Department of Psychology, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link AS402/28, Singapore, 117570, Singapore. 4. Department of Renal Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Assisted peritoneal dialysis (PD) involving caregivers allows more patients to get started on home-based dialysis with good clinical outcomes, but evidence on patient-reported and caregiver-reported outcomes is lacking. This study aimed to compare assisted PD versus self-care PD on quality of life (QoL) and psychosocial outcomes for patients and caregivers. The effect of PD modality [automated PD (APD); continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD)] in relation to self-care or assisted care was also examined. METHODS: A cross-sectional sample of 231 PD patients [142 self-care (57 APD/85 CAPD) and 89 assisted care PD (45 APD/44 CAPD)], 72 caregivers of assisted PD patients and 39 family members of self-care PD patients completed the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF), World Health Organisation Quality of Life Instrument-brief and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Caregivers and family members completed the Lay Care-Giving for Adults Receiving Dialysis questionnaire and Zarit Burden Interview. RESULTS: Case-mix-adjusted comparisons indicated comparable QoL in all dimensions with the exception of physical SF-12 (p = .001) and the KDQOL effects of kidney disease in favour of self-care PD. Levels of anxiety (9.72 ± 4.90; 8.25 ± 5.22) and depression (8.63 ± 3.80; 6.35 ± 4.76) were equivalent in assisted PD and self-care PD, respectively. Assisted PD caregivers reported more task-orientated duties (p = .007), yet levels of perceived burden were equal to those reported by family members of self-care PD. CONCLUSION: Our findings of mostly comparable patient and caregiver outcomes in assisted PD and self-care PD suggest that caregiver burden and QoL should not be a barrier to using assisted PD.
PURPOSE: Assisted peritoneal dialysis (PD) involving caregivers allows more patients to get started on home-based dialysis with good clinical outcomes, but evidence on patient-reported and caregiver-reported outcomes is lacking. This study aimed to compare assisted PD versus self-care PD on quality of life (QoL) and psychosocial outcomes for patients and caregivers. The effect of PD modality [automated PD (APD); continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD)] in relation to self-care or assisted care was also examined. METHODS: A cross-sectional sample of 231 PDpatients [142 self-care (57 APD/85 CAPD) and 89 assisted care PD (45 APD/44 CAPD)], 72 caregivers of assisted PDpatients and 39 family members of self-care PDpatients completed the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF), World Health Organisation Quality of Life Instrument-brief and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Caregivers and family members completed the Lay Care-Giving for Adults Receiving Dialysis questionnaire and Zarit Burden Interview. RESULTS: Case-mix-adjusted comparisons indicated comparable QoL in all dimensions with the exception of physical SF-12 (p = .001) and the KDQOL effects of kidney disease in favour of self-care PD. Levels of anxiety (9.72 ± 4.90; 8.25 ± 5.22) and depression (8.63 ± 3.80; 6.35 ± 4.76) were equivalent in assisted PD and self-care PD, respectively. Assisted PD caregivers reported more task-orientated duties (p = .007), yet levels of perceived burden were equal to those reported by family members of self-care PD. CONCLUSION: Our findings of mostly comparable patient and caregiver outcomes in assisted PD and self-care PD suggest that caregiver burden and QoL should not be a barrier to using assisted PD.
Authors: Wieneke M Michels; Sandra van Dijk; Marion Verduijn; Saskia le Cessie; Elisabeth W Boeschoten; Friedo W Dekker; Raymond T Krediet Journal: Perit Dial Int Date: 2011-02-28 Impact factor: 1.756
Authors: Philip Kam-Tao Li; Man Ching Law; Kai Ming Chow; Chi-Bon Leung; Bonnie Ching-Ha Kwan; Kwok Yi Chung; Cheuk-Chun Szeto Journal: Perit Dial Int Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 1.756
Authors: Sarah E Van Pilsum Rasmussen; Ann Eno; Mary G Bowring; Romi Lifshitz; Jacqueline M Garonzik-Wang; Fawaz Al Ammary; Daniel C Brennan; Allan B Massie; Dorry L Segev; Macey L Henderson Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2020-06-08
Authors: Melissa Nataatmadja; Rathika Krishnasamy; Li Zuo; Daqing Hong; Brendan Smyth; Min Jun; Janak R de Zoysa; Kirsten Howard; Jing Wang; Chunlai Lu; Zhangsuo Liu; Christopher T Chan; Alan Cass; Vlado Perkovic; Meg Jardine; Nicholas A Gray Journal: Kidney Int Rep Date: 2021-02-01
Authors: Ming Pei; Rute Aguiar; Agneta A Pagels; Olof Heimbürger; Peter Stenvinkel; Peter Bárány; Charlotte Medin; Stefan H Jacobson; Britta Hylander; Bengt Lindholm; Abdul Rashid Qureshi Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2019-04-29 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Amanda Baumgart; Karine E Manera; David W Johnson; Jonathan C Craig; Jenny I Shen; Lorena Ruiz; Angela Yee-Moon Wang; Terence Yip; Samuel K S Fung; Matthew Tong; Achilles Lee; Yeoungjee Cho; Andrea K Viecelli; Benedicte Sautenet; Armando Teixeira-Pinto; Edwina A Brown; Gillian Brunier; Jie Dong; Nicole Scholes-Robertson; Tony Dunning; Rajnish Mehrotra; Saraladevi Naicker; Roberto Pecoits-Filho; Jeffrey Perl; Martin Wilkie; Allison Tong Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Miquel Sitjar-Suñer; Rosa Suñer-Soler; Afra Masià-Plana; Emilia Chirveches-Pérez; Carme Bertran-Noguer; Concepció Fuentes-Pumarola Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-06-14 Impact factor: 3.390