Willingness to participate in a randomized trial comparing catheters to fistulas for vascular access in incident hemodialysis patients: an international survey of nephrologists

Krishna Poinen1, Matthew J. Oliver2, Pietro Ravani3,4, Sabine N. Van der Veer5, Kitty J. Jager6, Wim Van Biesen7, Kevan R. Polkinghorne8, Aviva Rosenfeld9, Adriane M. Lewin10, Mandeep Dulai10, Robert R. Quinn11
1Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
2Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
4Foothills Medical Centre, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
5Institute of Population Health, Health e-Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
6Department Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
7UZ Gent, Dienst Nefrologie, Ghent, Belgium
8Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, Australia
9Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology, Melbourne, Australia
10Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
11Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

Tóm tắt

Current guidelines favor fistulas over catheters as vascular access. Yet, the observational literature comparing fistulas to catheters has important limitations and biases that may be difficult to overcome in the absence of randomization. However, it is not clear if physicians would be willing to participate in a clinical trial comparing fistulas to catheters. We also sought to elicit participants’ opinions on willingness to participate in a future trial regarding catheters and fistulas. We created a three-part survey consisting of 19 questions. We collected demographic information, respondents’ knowledge of the vascular access literature, appropriateness of current guideline recommendations, and their willingness to participate in a future trial. Participants were recruited from Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Participants include physicians and trainees who are involved in the care of end-stage renal disease patients requiring vascular access. Descriptive statistics were used to describe baseline characteristics of respondents according to geographic location. We used logistic regression to model willingness to participate in a future trial. We surveyed nephrologists from Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand to assess their willingness to participate in a randomized trial comparing fistulas to catheters in incident hemodialysis patients. Our results show that in Canada, 86 % of respondents were willing to participate in a trial (32 % in all patients; 54 % only in patients at high risk of primary failure). In Europe and Australia/New Zealand, the willingness to participate in a trial that included all patients was lower (28 % in Europe; 25 % in Australia/New Zealand), as was a trial that included patients at high risk of primary failure (38 % in Europe; 39 % in Australia/New Zealand). Nephrologists who have been in practice for a few years, saw a larger volume of patients, or self-identified as experts in vascular access literature were more likely to participate in a trial. Survey distribution was limited to vascular access experts in participating European countries and ultimately led to a discrepancy in numbers of European to non-European respondents overall. Canadian views are likely over-represented in the overall outcomes. Our survey results suggest that nephrologists believe there is equipoise surrounding the optimal vascular access strategy and that a randomized controlled study should be undertaken, but restricted to those individuals with a high risk of primary fistula failure.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Coresh J, Selvin E, Stevens LA, et al. Prevalence of chronic kidney disease in the United States. JAMA. 2007;298(17):2038–47. Canadian Institute for Health Information. Canadian Organ Replacement Register Annual Report: treatment of end-stage organ failure in Canada, 2000 to 2009 (2011 annual report). Ottawa: CIHI; 2011. Collins AJ, Foley RN, Herzog C, et al. United States Renal Data System 2008 Annual Data Report. Am J Kidney Dis. 2009;53(1 Suppl):S1–374. doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.10.005. Sennfalt K, Magnusson M, Carlsson P. Comparison of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis—a cost-utility analysis. Perit Dial Int. 2002;22(1):39–47. Rodriguez-armona A, Perez FM, Bouza P, Garcia FT, Valdes F. The economic cost of dialysis: a comparison between peritoneal dialysis and in-center hemodialysis in a Spanish unit. Adv Perit Dial. 1996;12:93–6. Evans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison LP Jr, et al. The quality of life patients with end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med. 1985;312(9):553–9. De Vecchi AF, Dratwa M, Wiedemann ME. Healthcare systems and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) therapies—an international review: costs and reimbursement/funding of ESRD therapies. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1999;14 Suppl 6:31–41. Lee H, Manns B, Taub K, et al. Cost analysis of ongoing care of patients with end-stage renal disease: the impact of dialysis modality and dialysis access. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40(3):611–22. Dember LM, Beck GJ, Allon M, et al. Effect of clopidogrel on early failure of arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2008;299(18):2164–71. Oliver MJ, Verrelli M, Zacharias JM, et al. Choosing peritoneal dialysis reduces the risk of invasive access interventions. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(2):810–6. Quinn RR, Ravani P. Fistula-first and catheter-last: fading certainties and growing doubts. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2014;29(4):727–30. Oliver MJ, Quinn RR. Recalibrating vascular access for elderly patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014;9(4):645–7. Ravani P, Palmer SC, Oliver MJ, et al. Associations between hemodialysis access type and clinical outcomes: a systematic review. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;24:465–73. Moist LM, Trpeski L, Na Y, Lok CE. Increased hemodialysis catheter use in Canada and associated mortality risk: data from the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry 2001–2004. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2008;3(6):1726–32. Astor BC, Eustace JA, Powe NR, et al. Type of vascular access and survival among incident hemodialysis patients: the choices for healthy outcomes in caring for ESRD (CHOICE) study. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16(5):1449–55. Foundation NK. KDOQI: clinical practice guidelines and clinical practice recommendations for anemia in chronic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;47 Suppl 3:S1–S146. Tonelli M, Winkelmayer WC, Jindal KK, et al. The cost-effectiveness of maintaining higher hemoglobin targets with erythropoietin in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int. 2003;64:295–304. Roger SD, McMahon LP, Clarkson A, et al. Effects of early and late intervention with epoetin alpha on left ventricular mass among patients with chronic kidney disease (stage 3 or 4): results of a randomized clinical trial. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004;15:148–56. Levin A, Djurdjev O, Thompson C, et al. Canadian randomized trial of hemoglobin maintenance to prevent or delay left ventricular mass growth in patients with CKD. Am J Kidney Dis. 2005;46:799–811. Ritz E, Laville M, Bilous RW, et al. Target level for hemoglobin correction in patients with diabetes and CKD: primary results of the Anemia Correction in Diabetes (ACORD) Study. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007;49:194–207. Drueke T, Locatelli F, Clyne N, et al. Normalization of hemoglobin level in patients with chronic kidney disease and anemia. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2071–84. Lok CE. Fistula first initiative: advantages and pitfalls. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007;2(5):1043–53. Gallieni M, Saxena R, Davidson I. Dialysis access in Europe and North America: are we on the same path? Semin Interv Radiol. 2009;26(2):96–105. Polkinghorne KR, McDonald SP, Marshall MR, et al. Vascular access practice patterns in the New Zealand hemodialysis population. Am J Kidney Dis. 2004;43(4):696–704. Manns B, Hemmelgarn B, Lillie E, et al. Setting research priorities for patients on or nearing dialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014;9:1813–21.