首页> 外文期刊>British Medical Journal >Is there a rationale for rationing chronic dialysis? A hospital based cohort study of factors affecting survival and morbidity
【24h】

Is there a rationale for rationing chronic dialysis? A hospital based cohort study of factors affecting survival and morbidity

机译:配给慢性透析是否有理由?一项基于医院的队列研究,研究了影响生存率和发病率的因素

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives To determine factors influencing survival and need for hospitalisation in patients needing dialysis, and to define the potential basis for rationing access to renal replacement therapy. Design Hospital based cohort study of all patients starting dialysis over a 4 year recruitment period (follow up 15-63 months). Groups were defined on the basis of age, comorbidity, functional status, and whether dialysis initiation was planned or unplanned. Setting Renal unit in a district general hospital, which acts as the main renal referral centre for four other such hospitals and serves a population of about 1.15 million people. Subjects 292 patients, mean age 61.3 years (18-92 years, SD 15.8), of whom 193 (66%) were male, and 59 (20%) were patients with diabetes. Dialysis initiation was planned in 163 (56%) patients and unplanned in 129 (44%). Main outcome measures Overall survival, 1 year survival, and hospitalisation rate. Results Factors affecting survival in the Cox's proportional hazard model were Karnofsky performance score at presentation (hazard ratio 0.979,95% confidence interval 0.972 to 0.986), comorbidity severity score (1.240,1.131 to 1.340), age (1.036,1.018 to 1.054), and myeloma (2.15,1.140 to 4.042). The Karnofsky performance score used 3 months before presentation was significant (0.970, 0.956 to 0.981), as was unplanned presentation in this model (1,796,1.233 to 2.617). Using these factors, a high risk group of 26 patients was defined, with 19.2% 1 year survival. Denying dialysis to this group would save 3.2% of the total cost of die chronic programme but would sacrifice five long term survivors. Less rigorous definition of the high risk group would save more money but lose more long term survivors. Conclusions Severity of comorbid Conditions and functional capacity are more important than age in predicting survival and morbidity of patients on dialysis. Late referral for dialysis affects survival adversely. Denial of dialysis to patients in an extremely high risk group, defined by a new stratification based on logistic regression, would be of debatable benefit
机译:目的确定影响透析患者生存率和住院需求的因素,并确定配给肾脏替代疗法的潜在依据。设计医院为基础的队列研究,所有患者在4年的招募期间开始透析(随访15-63个月)。根据年龄,合并症,功能状态以及是否计划开始透析来定义组。在地区综合医院设置肾脏科,该医院是另外四家此类医院的主要肾脏转诊中心,服务于约115万人。受试者292例患者,平均年龄61.3岁(18-92岁,SD 15.8),其中193例(66%)为男性,59例(20%)为糖尿病患者。计划进行透析的患者有163名(56%),未经计划的有129名(44%)。主要结局指标总体生存率,1年生存率和住院率。结果Cox比例风险模型中影响生存的因素包括卡诺夫斯基表现评分(风险比0.979,95%置信区间0.972至0.986),合并症严重程度评分(1.240,1.131至1.340),年龄(1.036,1.018至1.054),和骨髓瘤(2.15,1.140至4.042)。出现前3个月使用的Karnofsky绩效评分显着(0.970,0.956至0.981),该模型中的计划外出现(1,796,1.233至2.617)。使用这些因素,将高危人群定义为26名患者,其1年生存率为19.2%。拒绝对此人群进行透析将节省慢性病总费用的3.2%,但会牺牲5名长期幸存者。对高危人群的较不严格的定义将节省更多的钱,但会失去更多的长期幸存者。结论合并症的严重程度和功能能力在预测透析患者的生存和发病率方面比年龄更重要。延迟转诊接受透析会对生存产生不利影响。通过基于逻辑回归的新分层定义,拒绝对极高风险组的患者进行透析将具有可争议的益处

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号