ERA-EDTA Registry, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nephrology Section, Department of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021 Dec 31;37(1):126-138. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfaa342.
Access to forms of dialysis, kidney transplantation (Tx) and comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) varies across European countries. Attitudes of nephrologists, information provision and decision-making may influence this access and nephrologists may experience several barriers when providing treatments for ESKD.
We surveyed European nephrologists and kidney transplant surgeons treating adults with ESKD about factors influencing modality choice. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the opinions of professionals from European countries with low-, middle- and high-gross domestic product purchasing power parity (GDP PPP).
In total, 681 professionals from 33 European countries participated. Respondents from all GDP categories indicated that ∼10% of patients received no information before the start of renal replacement therapy (RRT) (P = 0.106). Early information provision and more involvement of patients in decision-making were more frequently reported in middle- and high-GDP countries (P < 0.05). Professionals' attitudes towards several treatments became more positive with increasing GDP (P < 0.05). Uptake of in-centre haemodialysis was sufficient to 73% of respondents, but many wanted increased uptake of home dialysis, Tx and CCM. Respondents experienced different barriers according to availability of specific treatments in their centre. The occurrence of barriers (financial, staff shortage, lack of space/supplies and patient related) decreased with increasing GDP (P < 0.05).
Differences in factors influencing modality choice when providing RRT or CCM to adults with ESKD were found among low-, middle- and high-GDP countries in Europe. Therefore a unique pan-European policy to improve access to treatments may be inefficient. Different policies for clusters of countries could be more useful.
在欧洲各国,终末期肾病(ESKD)患者获得透析、肾移植(Tx)和综合保守治疗(CCM)的途径各不相同。肾病学家的态度、信息提供和决策可能会影响这种途径,并且在为 ESKD 患者提供治疗时,肾病学家可能会遇到多种障碍。
我们调查了治疗 ESKD 成人的欧洲肾病学家和肾移植外科医生,了解影响治疗方式选择的因素。使用描述性统计方法比较了来自低、中、高国内生产总值购买力平价(GDP PPP)欧洲国家的专业人员的意见。
共有来自 33 个欧洲国家的 681 名专业人员参加了这项研究。来自所有 GDP 类别的受访者均表示,约有 10%的患者在开始肾脏替代治疗(RRT)之前未获得任何信息(P = 0.106)。中高 GDP 国家更频繁地报告了早期信息提供和让患者更多地参与决策(P < 0.05)。随着 GDP 的增加,专业人员对几种治疗方法的态度变得更加积极(P < 0.05)。中心血液透析的接受率达到了 73%的受访者,但许多人希望增加家庭透析、Tx 和 CCM 的接受率。受访者根据其中心特定治疗方法的可用性经历了不同的障碍。随着 GDP 的增加,障碍的发生(财务、人员短缺、缺乏空间/供应和患者相关)减少(P < 0.05)。
在欧洲低、中、高 GDP 国家中,为 ESKD 成人提供 RRT 或 CCM 时影响治疗方式选择的因素存在差异。因此,改善治疗方法获取途径的独特泛欧政策可能效率低下。针对国家集群制定不同的政策可能会更有用。