Advertisement

Assigning severity indices to outcomes

  • Naseem S. Amin
Part of the Developments in Nephrology book series (DINE, volume 39)

Abstract

In other disease states the influence of both the severity of the primary disease and unrelated other comorbid diseases on the course of patients has been studied [1, 2]. However the majority of observational studies examining the End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) population are hampered in the conclusions they arrive at, because they have not quantified the severity of patient indices at baseline and related these to patient outcomes.

Keywords

Peritoneal Dialysis Dialysis Patient Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Peritoneal Dialysis Patient United States Renal Data System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Feinstein A. The pre-therapeutic classification of comorbidity in chronic disease. J Chron Dis 1970: 23:455 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaplan M and Feinstein A. The importance of classifying comorbidity in evaluating the outcome of diabetes mellitus. J Chron Dis 1974: 27:387 404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greenfield S, Blanco D, Elashoff R et al. Development and testing of a new index of comorbidity. Clin Res 1987: 35:346A.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greenfield S, Blanco D, Elashoff R et al. Patterns of care related to age of breast cancer patients. JAMA 1987; 257:2766–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Greenfield S and Nelson E. Recent developments and future issues in the use of health status assessment measures in clinical settings. Med Care 1992: 30:23 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Greenfield S, Apolone G, McNeil B et al. The importance of co-existent disease in the occurrence of postoperative complications and one-year recovery in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Med Care 1993; 31:141 54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hutchinson T, Thomas D and MacGibbon B. Predicting survival in adults with end-stage renal disease: An age equivalence index. Ann Intern Med 1982; 96:417 23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hutchinson T, Thomas D, Lemieux J et al. Prognostically controlled comparison of dialysis and renal transplantation. Kidney Int 1984; 26:44–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Collins A, Hanson G, Umen A, Kjellstrand C and Keshaviah P. Changing risk factor demographics in end-stage renal disease patients entering dialysis and the impact on long-term mortality. Am J Kidney Dis 1990; 15:422–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Collins AJ, Ma JZ, Umen A and Keshaviah P. Urea index and other predictors of renal outcomes study dialysis patient survival. Am J Kidney Dis 1994; 23:272 82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kjellstrand C, Hylander B and Collins A. Mortality on dialysis — on the influence of early start, patient characteristics, and transplantation and acceptance rates. Am J Kidney Dis 1990; 15:483–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McClellan W, Anson C, Birkeli K et al. Functional status and quality of life: predictor of early mortality among patients entering treatment for end-stage renal disease. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44:83–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McClellan W, Flanders W and Gutman R. Variable mortality rates among dialysis treatment centers. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117:332–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    USRDS. Comorbid conditions and correlations with mortality risk among, 3,399 incident dialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1992; 20:32 8.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    USRDS. Patient selection to peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis according to comorbid conditions. Am J Kidney Dis 1992; 20:20–6.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    European Dialysis and Transplantation Association: European Renal Association (EDTA-ERA. Report on management of renal failure in Europe, XXIII, 1992. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1992; 9:1–48.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    United States Renal Data System: USRDS 1993 Annual Data Report. Bltlheseda MD. The National Institute of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease, February 1993.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Registration Committee of Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy: An overview of regular dialysis treatment in Japan. Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy, 1993.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    United States Renal Data System: USRDS 1992 Annual Data Report. Betheseda MD, The National Institute of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fenton SA, Schaubel DE et al. Hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis: a comparison of adjusted mortality rates. Am. J Kid Dis 1997; 3:334–42.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Majorca R. Vonesh EF. Cavalli PL et al. A multicenter selection-adjusted comparison of patient and technique survivals on PD and hemodialysis. Perit Dial Int 1991; 11:118–27.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mion C, Mourad G, Canaud B et al. Maintenance dialysis: a survey of 17 years experience in Languedoc-Rousillon with a comparison of methods in a standard population. ASAIOJ 1983; 6:205–13.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kurtz SB and Johnson WJ. A four-year comparison of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis: a preliminary report. Mayo Clin Proc 1991; 59:659–62.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Charytan C, Spinowitz BS and Galler M. A comparative study of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and center hemodialysis. Arch Intern Med 1986; 146:1138 43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maiorca R, Vonesh E, Cancarini GC et al. A six year comparison of patient and technique survivals in PD and HD. Kidney Int 1988; 34:518–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lupo A, Cancarini G, Catizone L et al. Comparison of survival in PD and hemodialysis: a multicenter study. Adv Perit Dial 1992: 8:136–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gokal R, Jakubowski C, King J et al. Outcome in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis: 4-year analysis of a prospective multicentre study. Lancet 1987; ii:1105 9.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gentil MA, Cariazzo A, Pavon Ml et al. Comparison of survival in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis: a multicenter study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1991: 6:444 51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Capelli JP, Camiscioli TC and Vallorani RD. Comparative analysis of survival on home dialysis, in-center hemodialysis and chronic peritoneal dialysis (PD-IPD) therapies. Dial Transplant 1985; 14:38 52.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Evans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison L P et al. The quality of life of patients with end stage renal disease. N Eng J Med 1985;312:553 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Morris PLP and Jones B. Transplantation versus dialysis: A study of quality of life. Transpl Proc 1988: 20:23 6.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Simmons RG. Anderson CR and Abress LK. Quality of life and rehabilitation differences among four ESRD therapy groups. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1990; 131:7 22.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wolcott DL and Nissenson AR. Quality of life in chronic dialysis patients: a critical comparison of PD and HD. Am J Kidney Dis. 1988; 11:402 12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tucker CM. Ziller RC et al. Quality of life of patients on incenter HD versus PD. Perit Dial Int 1991; 11:341 6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Feinstein A. The pre-therapeutic classification of comorbidity in chronic disease. J Chron Dis 1970; 23:455 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Greenfield S, Blanco D, Elashoff R et al. Patterns of care related to age of breast cancer patients. JAMA 1987; 257:2766 70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Greenfield S, Blanco D, Elashoff R et al. Development and testing of a new index of comorbidity. Clin Res 1987; 35:346A.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Greenfield S, Apolone G, McNeil B et al. The Importance of co-existent disease in the occurrence of postoperative complications and one-year recovery in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Med Care 1993; 31:141 54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bennett C, Greenfield S, Aronow H et al. Patterns of care related to age of men with prostate cancer. Cancer 1991; 67:2633–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nicolucci A, Cubasso D, Labbrozzi D et al. Effect of coexistent diseases on survival of patients undergoing dialysis. Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Org 1992; 291 5.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Athienites NV. Sullivan L, Fernandez G et al. Pretreatment comorbidity and patient outcomes in peritoneal dialysis (PD). J Am Soc Neph 1994; 5:432.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    USRDS 1993 Annual Data Report. Appendix B. EPO and Quality of Life Study.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hutchinson T, Boyd N, Feinstein A et al. Scientific problems in clinical scales, as demonstrated in the Karnofsky Index of Performance Status. J Chron Dis 1979; 32:661 6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Meyer KB, Espindle DM, DeGiacomo J et al. Monitoring dialysis patients’ health status. Am J Kidney Dis 1994; 24:267 79PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kurtin P. Davis A, Meyer K et al. Patient-based health status measures in outpatient dialysis: early experiences in developing an outcomes assessment program. Med Care 1992; 30:136 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Meyer K, Kurtin P, DeOreo P et al. Health-related quality of life and clinical variables in dialysis patients. J Am Soc Neph 1992; 3:379.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hays, RD, Kallich JD, Mapes DL, Coons SJ and Carter WB. Development of the kidney disease quality of life (KDQOL) instrument. Qual Life Res. 1994; 3:239–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Naseem S. Amin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations