Establishing a peritoneal dialysis technique survival core outcome measure: A standardised outcomes in nephrology-peritoneal dialysis consensus workshop report

BackgroundTechnique survival, also reported with negative connotations as technique failure or transfer from peritoneal dialysis to haemodialysis, has been identified by patients, caregivers and health professionals as a critically important outcome to be reported in all trials. However, there is wide variation in how peritoneal dialysis technique survival is defined, measured and reported, leading to difficulty in comparing or consolidating results.MethodsWe conducted an online international consensus workshop to establish a core outcome measure of technique survival. Discussions were analysed thematically.ResultsFifty-five participants including 14 patients and caregivers from 13 countries took part in facilitated breakout discussions using video-conferencing. The following themes were identified: capturing important aspects of the outcome (requiring a core event to define the outcome, distinguishing temporary from permanent events, recognising heterogeneous experiences of transfers), adopting appropriate neutral nomenclature (conveying with clarity, avoiding negative connotations), and ensuring feasibility and applicability (capturing data relevant to clinical and research settings, ease of adoption). The suggested definitions for the core outcome measure were 'the event of a transfer to haemodialysis', or 'discontinuation of peritoneal dialysis'. Applying the principles described within the workshop, defining the outcome measure as a 'transfer to haemodialysis' was preferable.ConclusionsIt is proposed that the core outcome of technique survival is redefined as 'transfer to haemodialysis' and that its components are standardised using simple, neutral terminology Components considered important by stakeholders included recording the reasons for transfer from peritoneal dialysis, and focussing on permanent events whilst ensuring the outcome remains easy to implement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Peritoneal Dialysis International
Published
2024-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608241287684
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.26

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Establishing a peritoneal dialysis technique survival core outcome measure: A standardised outcomes in nephrology-peritoneal dialysis consensus workshop report

Mark Lambie, Emma Elphick, Karine Manera, Noa Amir et al.
2 citations
Peritoneal Dialysis International
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
2.26
article

Establishing a peritoneal dialysis technique survival core outcome measure: A standardised outcomes in nephrology-peritoneal dialysis consensus workshop report

Mark Lambie, Emma Elphick, Karine Manera, Noa Amir, Thu Nguyen, Tess Harris, Samaya J. Anumudu, Alison Jaure, Jonathan C. Craig, Adrian Liew, Yeoungjee Cho, David Wayne Johnson, Angela Yee‐Moon Wang, Robert R. Quinn, Arsh K. Jain, Jenny I. Shen, Annie‐Claire Nadeau‐Fredette, Neil C Boudville, Andrea K. Viecelli, Martin Wilkie, Andrea Matus‐Gonzalez, Daniela Ponce, Josephine Sau Fan Chow, Patricia Gooden, Simon Davies, Angela Ju
article en
2 citations

Abstract

BackgroundTechnique survival, also reported with negative connotations as technique failure or transfer from peritoneal dialysis to haemodialysis, has been identified by patients, caregivers and health professionals as a critically important outcome to be reported in all trials. However, there is wide variation in how peritoneal dialysis technique survival is defined, measured and reported, leading to difficulty in comparing or consolidating results.MethodsWe conducted an online international consensus workshop to establish a core outcome measure of technique survival. Discussions were analysed thematically.ResultsFifty-five participants including 14 patients and caregivers from 13 countries took part in facilitated breakout discussions using video-conferencing. The following themes were identified: capturing important aspects of the outcome (requiring a core event to define the outcome, distinguishing temporary from permanent events, recognising heterogeneous experiences of transfers), adopting appropriate neutral nomenclature (conveying with clarity, avoiding negative connotations), and ensuring feasibility and applicability (capturing data relevant to clinical and research settings, ease of adoption). The suggested definitions for the core outcome measure were 'the event of a transfer to haemodialysis', or 'discontinuation of peritoneal dialysis'. Applying the principles described within the workshop, defining the outcome measure as a 'transfer to haemodialysis' was preferable.ConclusionsIt is proposed that the core outcome of technique survival is redefined as 'transfer to haemodialysis' and that its components are standardised using simple, neutral terminology Components considered important by stakeholders included recording the reasons for transfer from peritoneal dialysis, and focussing on permanent events whilst ensuring the outcome remains easy to implement.

Peritoneal Dialysis InternationalVol. 45(3)
Western University (CA), The University of Sydney (AU), University of Tasmania (AU), Translational Research Institute (AU), The University of Queensland (AU), University of Calgary (CA), Flinders University (AU), The University of Western Australia (AU), Baylor College of Medicine (US), Queen Mary Hospital (CN), London Health Sciences Centre (CA), UCLA Medical Center (US), Auckland City Hospital (NZ), Princess Alexandra Hospital (AU), Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital (AU), Children's Hospital at Westmead (AU), Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital (SG), Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont (CA), UNSW Sydney (AU), Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Kidney Health Australia (AU), South Western Sydney Local Health District (AU), Harbor–UCLA Medical Center (US), Keele University (GB), Western Sydney University (AU), Université de Montréal (CA), Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) (BR), University of Hong Kong (HK)
National Health and Medical Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
2.26
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.