Suppr超能文献

新西兰透析相关实践和结果中的不平等:毛利人本位分析。

Inequity in dialysis related practices and outcomes in Aotearoa/New Zealand: a Kaupapa Māori analysis.

机构信息

Māori and Indigenous Health Institute, University of Otago Christchurch, 2 Riccarton Ave, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand.

Department of Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand.

出版信息

Int J Equity Health. 2018 Feb 20;17(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12939-018-0737-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In Aotearoa/New Zealand, Māori, as the indigenous people, experience chronic kidney disease at three times the rate of non-Māori, non-Pacific New Zealanders. Māori commence dialysis treatment for end-stage kidney disease at three times the rate of New Zealand European adults. To examine for evidence of inequity in dialysis-related incidence, treatment practices, and survival according to indigeneity in Aotearoa/New Zealand, utilising a Kaupapa Māori approach.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving adults who commenced treatment for end-stage kidney disease in Aotearoa/New Zealand between 2002 and 2011. We extracted data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) linked to the New Zealand National Health Index (NHI). Propensity score methods were used to assemble a cohort of 1039 Māori patients matched 1:1 on clinical and socio-demographic characteristics with a cohort of 1026 non-Māori patients. We compared incidence of end-stage kidney disease and treatment practices. Differences in the risks of all-cause mortality during treatment between propensity-matched cohorts were estimated using Cox proportional hazards and generalised linear models.

RESULTS

Non-Māori patients were older, more frequently lived in urban areas (83% versus 67% [standardised difference 0.38]) and bore less socioeconomic deprivation (36% living in highest decile areas versus 14% [0.53]). Fewer non-Māori patients had diabetes (35% versus 69%, [- 0.72]) as a cause of kidney failure. Non-Māori patients were more frequently treated with peritoneal dialysis (34% versus 29% [0.11]), received a pre-emptive kidney transplant (4% vs 1% [0.19]), and were referred to specialist care < 3 months before treatment (25% vs 19% [0.15]) than Māori patients. Fewer non-Māori started dialysis with a non-tunnelled dialysis vascular catheter (43% versus 47% [- 0.08]). The indigenous-age standardised incidence rate ratio for non-Māori commencing renal replacement therapy in 2011 was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.40-0.61) compared with Māori. Propensity score matching generated cohorts with similar characteristics, although non-Māori less frequently started dialysis with a non-tunnelled venous catheter (30% versus 47% [- 0.35]) or lived remotely (3% versus 14% [- 0.50]). In matched cohorts, non-Māori experienced lower all-cause mortality at 5 yr. after commencement of treatment (risk ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.72-0.84). New Zealand European patients experienced lower mortality than Māori patients in indigenous age-standardised analyses (age-standardised mortality rate ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.51-0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-Māori patients are treated with temporary dialysis vascular access less often than Māori, and experience longer life expectancy with dialysis, even when socioeconomic, demographic, and geographical factors are equivalent. Based on these disparities, health services should monitor and address inequitable treatment practices and outcomes in end-stage kidney disease care.

摘要

背景

在新西兰,毛利人作为原住民,患慢性肾脏病的比率是非毛利人、非太平洋岛裔新西兰人的三倍。毛利人开始接受终末期肾病透析治疗的比率是非毛利欧洲成年人的三倍。为了根据原住民身份检查新西兰透析相关发病率、治疗实践和生存率方面是否存在不平等现象,我们利用毛利人 Kaupapa 方法进行了一项回顾性队列研究。

方法

我们对 2002 年至 2011 年期间在新西兰开始接受终末期肾病治疗的成年人进行了一项回顾性队列研究。我们从澳大利亚和新西兰透析和移植登记处(ANZDATA)提取数据,并与新西兰国家健康指数(NHI)相关联。采用倾向评分方法,将 1039 名毛利患者与 1026 名非毛利患者按临床和社会人口统计学特征进行 1:1 匹配,组成一个队列。我们比较了两组患者终末期肾病的发病率和治疗情况。使用 Cox 比例风险和广义线性模型估计匹配队列之间治疗期间全因死亡率的风险差异。

结果

非毛利患者年龄较大,更多地居住在城市地区(83%比 67%[标准化差异 0.38]),社会经济剥夺程度较低(36%居住在最高十分位数地区,而 14%[0.53])。非毛利患者中糖尿病(35%比 69%[-0.72])作为肾衰竭的病因比例较低。非毛利患者更常接受腹膜透析(34%比 29%[0.11]),接受抢先肾移植(4%比 1%[0.19]),在开始治疗前不到 3 个月转至专科治疗(25%比 19%[0.15])的比例也高于毛利患者。非毛利患者开始透析时使用非隧道透析血管导管的比例较低(43%比 47%[-0.08])。与毛利人相比,2011 年非毛利人开始接受肾脏替代治疗的土著年龄标准化发病率比为 0.50(95%CI,0.40-0.61)。虽然非毛利患者开始透析时使用非隧道静脉导管的比例(30%比 47%[-0.35])或居住在偏远地区的比例(3%比 14%[-0.50])较低,但采用倾向评分匹配后生成的队列具有相似的特征。在匹配队列中,非毛利患者在开始治疗后 5 年的全因死亡率较低(风险比 0.78,95%CI 0.72-0.84)。在土著年龄标准化分析中,新西兰欧洲患者的死亡率低于毛利患者(年龄标准化死亡率比 0.58,95%CI 0.51-0.67)。

结论

与毛利人相比,非毛利患者接受临时透析血管通路治疗的比例较低,即使在社会经济、人口统计学和地理因素相当的情况下,接受透析治疗的预期寿命也更长。基于这些差异,卫生服务机构应监测和解决终末期肾病治疗中不平等的治疗实践和结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/aac0/5819180/07843df0309b/12939_2018_737_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验