Nicholas A Gray1,2, Li Zuo3, Daqing Hong4,5,6, Brendan Smyth4,7, Min Jun4, Janak De Zoysa8,9, Kha Vo4,10, Kirsten Howard11, Jing Wang12, Chunlai Lu13, Zhangsuo Liu14, Alan Cass15, Vlado Perkovic4, Meg Jardine4,16. 1. Department of Nephrology, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Birtinya, Queensland, Australia. 2. The University of Queensland, Sunshine Coast Clinical School, Birtinya, Queensland, Australia. 3. Department of Nephrology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. 4. The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Renal Department, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Chengdu, China. 6. University of Electronic Science and Technology of China Medical School, Chengdu, China. 7. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 8. Renal Service, North Shore Hospital, Waitemata DHB, Auckland, New Zealand. 9. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 10. Bureau of Health Information, NSW Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 11. Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 12. Department of Nephrology, First Affiliated Hospital of Dalain Medical University, Dalain, China. 13. Department of Nephrology, Shanghai 85th Hospital, Shanghai, China. 14. Department of Nephrology, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, China. 15. Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. 16. Department of Renal Medicine, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: To compare quality of life (QOL) of caregivers of dialysis patients with the cared for patients and population norms. METHODS: The ACTIVE Dialysis study randomized participants to extended (median 24 h/week) or standard (median 12 h/week) haemodialysis hours for 12 months. A subgroup of participants and their nominated caregivers completed QOL questionnaires including the EuroQOL-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ5D-3 L), short form-36 (SF-36, also allowing estimation of the SF-6D), as well as a bespoke questionnaire and the personal wellbeing index (PWI). Caregiver QOL was compared with dialysis patient QOL and predictors of caregiver QOL were determined using multivariable regression. RESULTS: There were 54 patients and caregiver pairs, predominantly from China. Caregivers mean (SD) age was 53.4 (11.3) years, 60% were female, 71% cared for their spouse/partner, and 36% were educated to university level. Caregivers had better physical but similar mental QOL compared with dialysis patients (mean SF-36 physical component summary: 46.9 ± 8.7 vs 40.4 ± 10.2, P < 0.001; mental component summary: 47.8 ± 9.7 vs 49.6 ± 12.0, P = 0.84). Health utility measured with EQ5D-3 L was not significantly different between caregivers and dialysis patients (mean 0.869 ± 0.185 vs 0.798 ± 0.227, P = 0.083). Caregiver PWI was 43.7 ± 15.5, significantly lower than the Chinese population norm (68.2 ± 14.2, P < 0.001). Higher physical and mental QOL among caregivers was predicted by university education but not age, gender or daily hours caring. CONCLUSION: Caregivers have higher physical and equivalent mental QOL to dialysis patients but poorer personal well-being than the Chinese population. University education predicts better QOL and may be a surrogate for socioeconomic or other factors. (NCT00649298).
RCT Entities:
AIM: To compare quality of life (QOL) of caregivers of dialysis patients with the cared for patients and population norms. METHODS: The ACTIVE Dialysis study randomized participants to extended (median 24 h/week) or standard (median 12 h/week) haemodialysis hours for 12 months. A subgroup of participants and their nominated caregivers completed QOL questionnaires including the EuroQOL-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ5D-3 L), short form-36 (SF-36, also allowing estimation of the SF-6D), as well as a bespoke questionnaire and the personal wellbeing index (PWI). Caregiver QOL was compared with dialysis patient QOL and predictors of caregiver QOL were determined using multivariable regression. RESULTS: There were 54 patients and caregiver pairs, predominantly from China. Caregivers mean (SD) age was 53.4 (11.3) years, 60% were female, 71% cared for their spouse/partner, and 36% were educated to university level. Caregivers had better physical but similar mental QOL compared with dialysis patients (mean SF-36 physical component summary: 46.9 ± 8.7 vs 40.4 ± 10.2, P < 0.001; mental component summary: 47.8 ± 9.7 vs 49.6 ± 12.0, P = 0.84). Health utility measured with EQ5D-3 L was not significantly different between caregivers and dialysis patients (mean 0.869 ± 0.185 vs 0.798 ± 0.227, P = 0.083). Caregiver PWI was 43.7 ± 15.5, significantly lower than the Chinese population norm (68.2 ± 14.2, P < 0.001). Higher physical and mental QOL among caregivers was predicted by university education but not age, gender or daily hours caring. CONCLUSION: Caregivers have higher physical and equivalent mental QOL to dialysis patients but poorer personal well-being than the Chinese population. University education predicts better QOL and may be a surrogate for socioeconomic or other factors. (NCT00649298).
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: Karan K Shah; Fliss E M Murtagh; Kevin McGeechan; Susan M Crail; Aine Burns; Rachael L Morton Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 2.388