| dc.description.translatedabstract | Background: Kidney is the organ in charge of the maintenance of human
homeostasis while it also behaves as an endocrine gland, producing several hormones.
Renal failure is a common consequence of many diseases such as hypertension and
diabetes. The permanent loss of renal function necessitates taking action by either
transplantation or some renal replacement treatment to keep the patient alive. Kidney
transplantation is the ideal option, although early and late complications should not be
underestimated. However, the shortage of renal grafts forces patients to depend on the
two renal replacement treatments, namely, hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Renal
replacement options are life-saving medical interventions that keep patient alive,
ensuring the minimum dialysis dose compatible with life.
Aim: In the modern era therapeutic interventions are subjected to cost as a result of
scarce health resources but at the same time they are being evaluated through their
overall effect on health status and their impact on quality of life. Home dialysis was
initially offered as a renal replacement treatment in 1960 due to the limitation of
monetary resources. The increased use of hospital hemodialysis led to a decline in the
use of home hemodialysis as a form of treatment for those requiring dialysis. Recent
interest in home dialysis has been attributed to lower costs, more efficient treatments
and the attainment of better outcomes than in hospital hemodialysis.
Sample and method: A systematic review of the literature on home hemodialysis
was performed in the databases Pubmed SCOPUS and CINAHL. Other statistical data
on home hemodialysis were also collected from scientific papers and the USRDS,
ANZDATA, WHO, and ERA registries.
Results: The search of the recent renal literature indicates strong positive support for
home dialysis which is attracting the attention of health policy stakeholders, doctors,
and patients alike. This positive view of home dialysis is supported by several studies
comparing renal replacement treatments in terms of cost-effectiveness and patients’
quality of life.
Conclusion: The revival of home dialysis is imperative, if the effort is to address the
increasing number of people requiring dialysis and maximize the efficiency of
treatment options and the resulting benefits in overall health and quality of life,
especially in light of the equivalent or lower costs in the modality of treatment.
Keywords: Home hemodialysis, quality of life, dialysis adequacy. | el_GR |
