To the Editor We read with great interest the recent Original Investigation by Nguyen and colleagues.1 Emergency-only dialysis strategy is used to treat life-threatening manifestations of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in undocumented immigrants with no access to scheduled dialysis without health insurance and is only used in France for the duration of a tourist visa (maximum, 90 days). This situation represents ethical dilemmas for clinicians and is common in Europe where immigrants represent about 1.5% of the dialysis population.2 This important study contributes to the management of undocumented immigrants with ESRD by reporting significant differences in health and economic outcomes in favor of a scheduled dialysis strategy. We further comment on the study design and method for the costs analysis, as well as their potential influence on the findings.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Godefroy R, Loubière S, Robert T. Comparison of Scheduled vs Emergency-Only Dialysis in Undocumented Immigrants With End-stage Renal Disease. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(5):728. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0540
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: