The effect of home versus in-centre dialysis on patient-reported and clinical outcomes: a target trial emulation study

Clicks: 11
ID: 337425
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #216 of 228 articles by views in clinical kidney journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 228 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background To make an informed decision between dialysis modalities, reliable information is needed on how each option may affect outcomes that matter to patients. Therefore, we aimed to 1) assess the effect of home dialysis (i.e. peritoneal dialysis [PD] and home haemodialysis) versus in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD, daytime and nocturnal), and 2) assess the effect of PD versus conventional daytime ICHD on patient-reported and clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a multicentre cohort study in Dutch and Belgian incident dialysis patients. Primary outcomes were health-related quality of life and dialysis-related symptoms. Secondary outcomes were risk of first hospitalization and all-cause mortality. The target trial emulation framework was used and marginal structural models were fitted. Results In this study, including 2110 incident dialysis patients, no differences between home dialysis and ICHD were found in patient-reported outcomes and risk of first hospitalisation over three years. No difference in all-cause mortality was observed in the first two years. The 3-year hazard ratio (HR) showed a difference in favour of ICHD (HR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.08; 2.92), but sensitivity analyses did not confirm this result. These findings were consistent when comparing PD to conventional ICHD. Conclusion We found no differences in patient-reported outcomes, risk of first hospitalisation, and mortality between home dialysis and ICHD, nor between PD and conventional ICHD, in the first three years after dialysis initiation. The absence of evidence for a difference in these outcomes underlines the importance of patient preference in dialysis modality selection to ensure the therapy fits optimally into the patient’s life.
Reference Key
openalex_W7223997332 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Esmee Driehuis, Thomas Sebastiaan van Lieshout, Anita van Eck van der Sluijs, Roemer J. Janse, Emiel W.G. de Bruin, Marc A G J ten Dam, Marc H. Hemmelder, Karen Prantl, Frans J. van Ittersum, Marianne Christina Verhaar, Friedo Wilhelm Dekker, Brigit C. van Jaarsveld, Alferso C Abrahams
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal clinical kidney journal
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ckj/sfag385
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfag385
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.