Search

Purpose: Brazil has one of the world's highest numbers of patients on hemodialysis (HD). Most dialysis centers are private and perform HD for patients with private and public health insurance. We compared 1-year survival between patients initiating chronic HD with public and private health insurance., Methods: This is an HD register-based retrospective cohort. Adult patients starting HD from January 2011 to December 2021 were included. Survival analysis was stratified according to the period entered in the HD register. Multivariate Cox regression focused on 1-year survival differences between private and public patients., Results: In the final sample (n = 5114), 68.5% of participants had public and 31.3% to private health insurance, with overall 1-year survival of 92.8% and 89.9%, respectively (p = 0.002). Crude analysis showed a slightly higher survival rate among patients with public health insurance than those with private health insurance (91 vs. 87%, p = 0.030) in the first period (2019-21). However, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) did not remain significantly higher for patients with private health insurance compared to those with public health insurance (HR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.80-1.41; p = 0.651), even after propensity score matching of the groups by several baseline features., Conclusion: Brazilian chronic HD patients funded by either private health plans or the public system have a similar 1-year mortality risk after controlling for several sociodemographic and clinical parameters., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)

Purpose: Few studies have evaluated patients' characteristics and survival by dialysis modality in Brazil. We evaluated changes in dialysis modality and its survival in the country., Methods: This is a retrospective database of a cohort with incident chronic dialysis patients from Brazil. Patients' characteristics and one-year multivariate survival risk were assessed considering dialysis modality from 2011 to 2016 and 2017 to 2021. Survival analysis was also performed on a reduced sample after adjustment using propensity score matching., Results: Of the 8295 dialysis patients, 5.3% were on peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 94.7% on hemodialysis (HD). PD patients had higher BMI, schooling and the prevalence of elective dialysis starting in the first period than those on HD. In the second period, PD patients were predominantly women, non-white, from the Southeast region, and funded by the public health system, having more frequent elective dialysis starting and predialysis nephrologist follow-ups than those on HD. There was no difference in mortality comparing PD and HD (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39-2.42; and HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.63-2.16; first and second period, respectively). This non-significantly different survival between both dialysis methods was also found in the reduced matched sample. Higher age and non-elective dialysis initiation were associated with higher mortality. In the second period, the lack of predialysis nephrologist follow-up and living in the Southeast region increased the mortality risk., Conclusion: Some sociodemographic factors have changed according to dialysis modality over the last decade in Brazil. The one-year survival of the two dialysis methods was comparable., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)

Purpose: Brazil is the third country globally in dialysis patients. Little is known about the impact of the type of health insurance on the outcome of these patients after COVID-19., Methods: We analyzed comorbidities, sociodemographic factors, and dialysis-related parameters from a retrospective cohort study of 1866 Brazilian chronic hemodialysis patients with COVID-19 from Feb 2020-July 2021. We evaluated the influence of health insurance (private vs. public) on the intensive care unit admission and 90 day fatality risk., Results: From 1866 hemodialysis patients, 455 (24%) were admitted to the intensive care unit, and 350 (19%) died. The mean age was 57.5 years, 88% had public health insurance. Crude case-fatality rate was not different between groups (private vs. public risk ratio 1.11; 95% CI 0.82-1.52, p = 0.498). In fully adjusted multivariate models, patients with private health insurance did not have a higher chance to be admitted to an intensive care unit (odds ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.63-1.50, p = 0.888), but they presented a lower death risk (hazard ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.37-0.85, p = 0.006)., Conclusion: The type of health insurance did not influence the access of hemodialysis patients with COVID-19 to an intensive care unit, but patients with private health insurance had a lower mortality risk., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)