The Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS): Unifying Efforts to Inform Practice and Improve Global Outcomes in Peritoneal Dialysis
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2016
The Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS): Unifying Efforts to Inform Practice and Improve Global Outcomes in Peritoneal Dialysis
Extending technique survival on peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains a major challenge in optimizing outcomes for PD patients while increasing PD utilization. The primary objective of the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS) is to identify modifiable practices associated with improvements in PD technique and patient survival. In collaboration with the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD), PDOPPS seeks to standardize PD-related data definitions and provide a forum for effective international collaborative clinical research in PD.
Methods
The PDOPPS is an international prospective cohort study in Australia, Canada, Japan, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US). Each country is enrolling a random sample of incident and prevalent patients from national samples of 20 to 80 sites with at least 20 patients on PD. Enrolled patients will be followed over an initial 3-year study period. Demographic, comorbidity, and treatment-related variables, and patient-reported data, will be collected over the study course. The primary outcome will be all-cause PD technique failure or death; other outcomes will include cause-specific technique failure, hospitalizations, and patient-reported outcomes.
Results
A high proportion of the targeted number of study sites has been recruited to date in each country. Several ancillary studies have been funded with high momentum toward expansion to new countries and additional participation.
Conclusion
The PDOPPS is the first large, international study to follow PD patients longitudinally to capture clinical practice. With data collected, the study will serve as an invaluable resource and research platform for the international PD community, and provide a means to understand variation in PD practices and outcomes, to identify optimal practices, and to ultimately improve outcomes for PD patients.
RubinH.R., FinkN.E., PlantingaL.C., SadlerJ.H., KligerA.S., PoweN.R.Patient ratings of dialysis care with peritoneal dialysis vs hemodialysis.JAMA2004; 291: 697–703.
2.
MoistL.M., PortF.K., OrzolS.M., YoungE.W., OstbyeT., WolfeR.A.Predictors of loss of residual renal function among new dialysis patients.J Am Soc Nephrol2000; 11: 556–64.
3.
JansenM.A., HartA.A., KorevaarJ.C., DekkerF.W., BoeschotenE.W., KredietR.T.Predictors of the rate of decline of residual renal function in incident dialysis patients.Kidney Int2002; 62: 1046–53.
4.
LysaghtM.J., VoneshE.F., GotchF., IbelsL., KeenM., LindholmB.The influence of dialysis treatment modality on the decline of remaining renal function.ASAIO Trans1991; 37: 598–604.
5.
McDonaldS.P., MarshallM.R., JohnsonD.W., PolkinghorneK.R.Relationship between dialysis modality and mortality.J Am Soc Nephrol2009; 20: 155–63.
6.
PerlJ., WaldR., McFarlaneP., BargmanJ.M., VoneshE., NaY.Hemodialysis vascular access modifies the association between dialysis modality and survival.J Am Soc Nephrol2011; 22: 1113–21.
7.
MehrotraR., ChiuY.W., Kalantar-ZadehK., BargmanJ., VoneshE.Similar outcomes with hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease.Arch Intern Med2011; 171: 110–8.
8.
KlarenbachS., MannsB.Economic evaluation of dialysis therapies.Semin Nephrol2009; 29: 524–32.
9.
LiemY.S., WongJ.B., HuninkM.G., de CharroF.T., WinkelmayerW.C.Comparison of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis survival in the Netherlands.Kidney Int2007; 71: 153–8.
10.
QuinnR.R., HuxJ.E., OliverM.J., AustinP.C., TonelliM., LaupacisA.Selection bias explains apparent differential mortality between dialysis modalities.J Am Soc Nephrol2011; 22: 1534–42.
11.
JainA.K., BlakeP., CordyP., GargA.X.Global trends in rates of peritoneal dialysis.J Am Soc Nephrol2012; 23: 533–44.
12.
PerlJ., WaldR., BargmanJ.M., NaY., JassalS.V., JainA.K.Changes in patient and technique survival over time among incident peritoneal dialysis patients in Canada.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2012; 7: 1145–54.
13.
MehrotraR., KermahD., FriedL., Kalantar-ZadehK., KhawarO., NorrisK.Chronic peritoneal dialysis in the United States: declining utilization despite improving outcomes.J Am Soc Nephrol2007; 18: 2781–8.
14.
MaiorcaR., VoneshE., CancariniG.C., CantaluppiA., ManiliL., BrunoriG.A six-year comparison of patient and technique survivals in CAPD and HD.Kidney Int1988; 34: 518–24.
15.
SerkesK.D., BlaggC.R., NolphK.D., VoneshE.F., ShapiroF.Comparison of patient and technique survival in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and hemodialysis: a multicenter study.Perit Dial Int1990; 10: 15–9.
16.
ChuiB.K., MannsB., PannuN., DongJ., WiebeN., JindalK.Health care costs of peritoneal dialysis technique failure and dialysis modality switching.Am J Kidney Dis2013; 61: 104–11.
17.
PisoniR.L., GillespieB.W., DickinsonD.M., ChenK., KutnerM.H., WolfeR.A.The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS): design, data elements, and methodology.Am J Kidney Dis2004; 44: 7–15.
18.
RobinsonB., FullerD., ZinsserD., AlbertJ., GillespieB., TentoriF.The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) Practice Monitor: rationale and methods for an initiative to monitor the new US bundled dialysis payment system.Am J Kidney Dis2011; 57: 822–31.
19.
RobinsonB.M., BieberB., PisoniR.L., PortF.K.Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS): its strengths, limitations, and role in informing practices and policies.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2012; 7: 1897–905.
20.
TentoriF., FullerD.S., PortF.K., BieberB.A., RobinsonB.M., PisoniR.L.The DOPPS Practice Monitor for US dialysis care: potential impact of recent guidelines and regulatory changes on management of mineral and bone disorder among US hemodialysis patients.Am J Kidney Dis2014; 63: 851–4.
21.
HeckingM., KaraboyasA., SaranR., SenA., HorlW.H., PisoniR.L.Predialysis serum sodium level, dialysate sodium, and mortality in maintenance hemodialysis patients: the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS).Am J Kidney Dis2012; 59: 238–48.
22.
JadoulM., ThummaJ., FullerD.S., TentoriF., LiY., MorgensternH.Modifiable practices associated with sudden death among hemodialysis patients in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2012; 7: 765–74.
23.
PisoniR.L., ArringtonC.J., AlbertJ.M., EthierJ., KimataN., KrishnanM.Facility hemodialysis vascular access use and mortality in countries participating in DOPPS: an instrumental variable analysis.Am J Kidney Dis2009; 53: 475–91.
24.
PisoniR.L., YoungE.W., DykstraD.M., GreenwoodR.N., HeckingE., GillespieB.Vascular access use in Europe and the United States: results from the DOPPS.Kidney Int2002; 61: 305–16.
25.
OkamotoK., KobayashiS., NoiriE.Longer treatment time and slower ultrafiltration in hemodialysis: associations with reduced mortality in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study.Kidney Int2006; 70: 1877; author reply 1877–8.
26.
SaranR., Bragg-GreshamJ.L., LevinN.W., TwardowskiZ.J., WizemannV., SaitoA.Longer treatment time and slower ultrafiltration in hemodialysis: associations with reduced mortality in the DOPPS.Kidney Int2006; 69: 1222–8.
27.
de OliveiraR.B., LopesA.A., SessoR., de CamposL.G., MarianiL., LugonJ.R.The Chronic Kidney Disease Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study Brazil (CKDopps-Brazil): design, data and methodology.J Bras Nefrol2014; 36: 96–101.
28.
NakamotoH., KawaguchiY., SuzukiH.Is technique survival on peritoneal dialysis better in Japan?Perit Dial Int2006; 26: 136–43.
29.
JoseM.D., JohnsonD.W., MudgeD.W., TranaeusA., VossD., WalkerR.Peritoneal dialysis practice in Australia and New Zealand: a call to action.Nephrology (Carlton)2011; 16: 19–29.
30.
TangriN., AnsellD., NaimarkD.Predicting technique survival in peritoneal dialysis patients: comparing artificial neural networks and logistic regression.Nephrol Dial Transplant2008; 23: 2972–81.
31.
AfolaluB., TroidleL., OsayimwenO., BhargavaJ., KitsenJ., FinkelsteinF.O.Technique failure and center size in a large cohort of peritoneal dialysis patients in a defined geographic area.Perit Dial Int2009; 29: 292–6.
32.
SchaubelD.E., BlakeP.G., FentonS.S.Effect of renal center characteristics on mortality and technique failure on peritoneal dialysis.Kidney Int2001; 60: 1517–24.
33.
HuismanR.M., NieuwenhuizenM.G., Th de CharroF.Patient-related and centre-related factors influencing technique survival of peritoneal dialysis in the Netherlands.Nephrol Dial Transplant2002; 17: 1655–60.
34.
SchaubelD.E., BlakeP.G., FentonS.S.Effect of renal center characteristics on mortality and technique failure on peritoneal dialysis.Kidney Int2001; 60: 1517–24.
35.
AllenN., SchwartzD., SoodA.R., MendelssohnD., VerrelliM., TannaG.Perceived barriers to guidelines in peritoneal dialysis.Nephrol Dial Transplant2011; 26: 1683–9.
36.
LambieM., DaviesS., PerlJ., JohnsonD., WilkieM., PisoniR.Standardising data definitions for peritoneal dialysis (PD):progress towards P-DOPPS.J Am Soc Nephrol2012; 23: 54A.
37.
SchaubelD.E., WeiG.Double inverse-weighted estimation of cumulative treatment effects under nonproportional hazards and dependent censoring.Biometrics2011; 67: 29–38.
38.
MendelssohnD.C., EthierJ., ElderS.J., SaranR., PortF.K., PisoniR.L.Haemodialysis vascular access problems in Canada: results from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS II).Nephrol Dial Transplant2006; 21: 721–8.
KawanishiH., MoriishiM., KatsutaniS., SakikuboE., TsuchiyaS.Hemodialysis together with peritoneal dialysis is one of the simplest ways to maintain adequacy in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.Adv Perit Dial1999; 15: 127–31.
