The effects and differences of kidney transplantation and hemodialysis treatments on quality of life

Abstract

Aim: Renal replacement therapies (RRT), including dialysis modalities and renal transplantation (RT), affect patients’ quality of life (QoL) differently. This study aimed to determine the factors affecting the QoL in hemodialysis (HD) and RT patients. Material and Method: One hundred patients in each RT and HD group were included in the study. Socio-demographic data was determined with a questionnaire. Laboratory information and other medical information of the patients were obtained from the medical records. Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) scales were used to assess the QoL. Results: The mean ages in HD and RT patients were 58.28±15.21 and 47.92±12.01 years. Most patients were male (53% HD, 68% RT). RT patients had a higher QoL than HD patients in all components. On the NHP scale, RT patients had higher QoL in all parts except social isolation and emotional reactions. Male gender, non-smoker status, high education level, being employed and living in the city, and some laboratory parameters (hemoglobin, ferritin, sodium, calcium, magnesium, and albumin) positively affected the QoL in the HD group; diabetes and CVD had a negative impact on the QoL. In the RT group, male gender, high education level, being employed; normal potassium, phosphorus, and parathormone levels affect QoL positively while hypertension and CVD negatively affect the QoL. Conclusion: Factors affecting QoL in patients receiving RRT are different. Efforts to correct laboratory parameters may impact the quality of life in HD patients. Returning to working life could increase the QoL in RT patients.

Keywords

• Hemodialysis
• quality of life
• renal transplantation

Böbrek nakli ve hemodiyaliz hastalarında yaşam kalitesini etkileyen faktörler farklılık göstermektedir

Abstract

Amaç: Diyaliz modalitelerini ve böbrek naklini (BN) içeren renal replasman tedavileri (RRT), hastaların yaşam kalitesini (QoL) farklı şekilde etkiler. Bu çalışmada hemodiyaliz (HD) ve BN hastalarında yaşam kalitesini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya RT ve HD gruplarının her birinde 100 hasta dahil edildi. Sosyo-demografik veriler anket yolu ile toplandı. Hastaların laboratuvar ve diğer tıbbi bilgileri tıbbi kayıtlarından elde edildi. Yaşam kalitesini değerlendirmek için Kısa Form-36 (SF-36) ve Nottingham Sağlık Profili (NHP) ölçekleri kullanıldı. Bulgular: HD ve BN hastalarında ortalama yaşlar sırasıyla 58,28±15,21 ve 47,92±12,01 idi. Hastaların çoğu erkekti (%53 HD, %68 BN). Böbrek nakli hastaları, tüm bileşenlerde HD hastalarından daha yüksek bir yaşam kalitesine sahipti. NHP ölçeğinde, BN hastalarının sosyal izolasyon ve duygusal tepkiler dışında tüm alanlarda yaşam kalitesi daha yüksekti. HD grubunda erkek cinsiyet, sigara içmeme, yüksek eğitim düzeyi, çalışıyor ve şehirde yaşıyor olmak ile bazı laboratuvar parametreleri (hemoglobin, ferritin, sodyum, kalsiyum, magnezyum ve albümin düzeyleri) yaşam kalitesini olumlu yönde etkilerken; diyabet ve kardiyovasküler hastalık (KVH) yaşam kalitesi üzerinde olumsuz bir etkiye sahipti. BN grubunda erkek cinsiyet, yüksek eğitim düzeyi, çalışıyor olmak; normal potasyum, fosfor ve parathormon seviyeleri QoL’yi olumlu etkilerken, KVH ve hipertansiyon QoL’yi olumsuz etkilemekteydi. Sonuç: Farklı RRT alan hastalarda yaşam kalitesini etkileyen faktörler farklıdır. HD hastalarında laboratuvar parametrelerini düzeltmek için çaba göstermek yaşam kalitesi üzerinde etkili olabilir. Çalışma hayatına dönüş, BN hastalarında yaşam kalitesini artırabilir.

Keywords

• Böbrek nakli
• hemodiyaliz
• yaşam kalitesi

References

1. Süleymanlar G, Utaş C, Arinsoy T, et al. A population-based survey of Chronic REnal Disease In Turkey--the CREDIT study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011; 26: 1862-71.
2. Wyld M, Morton RL, Hayen A, Howard K, Webster AC. A systematic review and meta-analysis of utility-based quality of life in chronic kidney disease treatments. PLoS Med 2012; 9: e1001307.
3. Demiral Y, Ergor G, Unal B, et al. Normative data and discriminative properties of short form 36 (SF-36) in Turkish urban population. BMC Public Health 2006; 6: 1-8.
4. Kücükdeveci AA, McKenna SP, Kutlay S, Gürsel Y, Whalley D, Arasil T. The development and psychometric assessment of the Turkish version of the Nottingham Health Profile. Int J Rehabil Res 2000; 23: 31-8.
5. Atas DB, Arikan H, Ecder SA, Ciftci H. Comparison of Anxiety, Depression and the Quality of Life Between Hemodialysis and Renal Transplantation Patients. Turkish J Nephrol 2017; 26: 171-6.
6. Sanchez S, Teelucksingh S, Ali R, Bailey H, Legall G. Quality of life and health status among patients receiving renal replacement therapy in Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies. Int J Nephrol Renovasc Dis 2021; 14: 173-92.
7. Johnson CD, Wicks MN, Milstead J, Hartwig M, Hathaway DK. Racial and gender differences in quality of life following kidney transplantation. Image J Nurs Sch 1998; 30: 125-30.
8. Liu H, Feurer ID, Dwyer K, Speroff T, Shaffer D, Wright Pinson C. The effects of gender and age on health-related quality of life following kidney transplantation. J Clin Nurs 2008; 17: 82-9.

9. Mujais SK, Story K, Brouillette J, et al. Health-related quality of life in CKD Patients: correlates and evolution over time. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009; 4: 1293-301.
10. Chisholm-Burns MA, Erickson SR, Spivey CA, Kaplan B. Health-related quality of life and employment among renal transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 2012; 26: 411-7.
11. Bohlke M, Marini SS, Gomes RH, et al. Predictors of employment after successful kidney transplantation - a population-based study. Clin Transplant 2008; 22: 405-10.
12. Han KT, Park EC, Kim JH, Kim SJ, Park S. Is marital status associated with quality of life? Health Qual Life Outcomes 2014; 12: 109.
13. Luttik ML, Jaarsma T, Veeger N, van Veldhuisen DJ. Marital status, quality of life, and clinical outcome in patients with heart failure. Heart Lung 2006; 35: 3-8.
14. Jatoi A, Novotny P, Cassivi S, et al. Does marital status impact survival and quality of life in patients with non-small cell lung cancer? Observations from the mayo clinic lung cancer cohort. Oncologist 2007;12: 1456-63.
15. Buffart LM, Kalter J, Sweegers MG, et al. Effects and moderators of exercise on quality of life and physical function in patients with cancer: An individual patient data meta-analysis of 34 RCTs. Cancer Treat Rev 2017; 52: 91-104.
16. Yardımcıoğlu F. Eğitim ve sağlık ilişkisi: Panel eşbütünleşme ve panel nedensellik analizi. Int J Econ Soc Res 2013; 9: 49-74.
17. Kefale B, Alebachew M, Tadesse Y, Engidawork E. Quality of life and its predictors among patients with chronic kidney disease: A hospital-based cross sectional study. PLoS One 2019; 14: e0212184.
18. de Groot IB, Veen JI, van der Boog PJ, van Dijk S, Stiggelbout AM, Marang-van de Mheen PJ; PARTNER-study group. Difference in quality of life, fatigue and societal participation between living and deceased donor kidney transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 2013; 27: 415-23.
19. Griva K, Ziegelmann JP, Thompson D, et al. Quality of life and emotional responses in cadaver and living related renal transplant recipients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002; 17: 2204-11.
20. Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Quality of life and diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 1999; 15: 205-18.
21. Jacobson AM. Quality of life in patients with diabetes mellitus. Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry 1997; 2: 82-93.
22. Apostolou T, Hutchison AJ, Boulton AJ, et al. Quality of life in CAPD, transplant, and chronic renal failure patients with diabetes. Ren Fail 2007; 29: 189-97.
23. Wändell PE, Brorsson B, Åberg H. Quality of life in diabetic patients registered with primary health care services in Sweden. Scand J Prim Health Care 1997; 15: 97-102.
24. Cepeda-Valery B, Cheong AP, Lee A, Yan BP. Measuring health related quality of life in coronary heart disease: The importance of feeling well. Int J Cardiol 2011; 149: 4-9.
25. De Smedt D, Clays E, Annemans L, et al. Health related quality of life in coronary patients and its association with their cardiovascular risk profile: results from the EUROASPIRE III survey. Int J Cardiol 2013; 168: 898-903.
26. Brown N, Melville M, Gray D, et al. Quality of life four years after acute myocardial infarction: short form 36 scores compared with a normal population. Heart 1999; 81: 352-8.
27. De Visser C, Bilo H, Groenier K, De Visser W, Meyboom-de Jong B. The influence of cardiovascular disease on quality of life in type 2 diabetics. Qual Life Res 2002; 11: 249-61.
28. Chambers BA, Guo SS, Siervogel R, Hall G, Chumlea WC. Cumulative effects of cardiovascular disease risk factors on quality of life. J Nutr Health Aging 2002; 6: 179-84.